The  Government   of 
American  Cities 

A  Program  of  Democracy 


By 

Horace  E.  Deming 


A  Study  of  Municipal  Organization  and  of  the 
Relation  of  the  City  to  the  State 


Also  a  Reprint  of  The  Municipal  Program  of 
The  National  Municipal  League 


G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 

New  York  and  London 

Hbe  "Knickerbocker    press 

1909 


COPYRIGHT,  1909 


HORACE  E.  DEMING 


.  T  GENERAL 


TTbc  Itnicfeerbocfeer  preea,  View 


The  author  is  entirely  responsible  for  the 
statements  of  fact  and  of  opinion  contained  in 
this  book,  but  he  gratefully  acknowledges  the 
great  assistance  he  has  received  from  the  criti- 
cisms of  Prof.  W.  B.  Munro  of  Harvard  Univer- 
sity, Prof.  John  A.  Fairlie  of  the  University 
of  Michigan,  Dr.  Delos  F.  Wilcox  of  New  York, 
and  Mr.  Charles  Richardson  and  Mr.  Clinton 
Rogers  Woodruff  of  Philadelphia,  who  read  the 
entire  work  in  manuscript;  from  Dr.  Frederick 
A.  Cleveland  of  the  Bureau  of  Municipal  Re- 
search, and  Dr.  Milo  R.  Maltbie  of  the  Public 
Service  Commission,  New  York  City,  and  Dr. 
W.  B.  Bailey  of  Yale  University,  who  examined 
parts  of  the  book.  Messrs.  Munro,  Fairlie,  and 
Wilcox  have  placed  the  author  under  yet  further 
obligations  by  reading  and  criticizing  the  proofs 
of  the  book  as  it  passed  through  the  press. 

H.  E.  D. 


iii 


PREFACE 

THE  failure  of  city  government  in  the  United 
States  is  not  a  failure  of  democracy. 

On  the  contrary  it  is  and  it  has  been  due  to  the 
failure  to  apply  to  city  government  in  America 
the  same  democratic  principles  that,  so  far  as 
they  have  been  applied,  are  the  cause  of  good 
government  in  state  and  nation. 

The  nearest  approach  to  a  government  repre- 
sentative of  and  accountable  to  the  governed  is 
found  in  successfully  governed  cities.  This  book 
aims  to  show  that  the  misgovernment  of  American 
cities  is  due  not  to  the  defects  of  democratic 
principles  (nor  to  any  dissimilarity  in  the  principles 
of  correct  city  government  and  the  principles 
of  civil  government  generally),  but  to  an  utter 
failure  to  apply  them;  that  the  successful  con- 
duct of  city  government,  the  world  over,  has 
been  in  direct  proportion  to  the  application  of 
the  fundamental  principles  of  democracy,  and 
that  the  experience  of  European  cities  has  demon- 
strated that  the  complexity  of  city  government 
is  in  the  variety  and  magnitude  of  the  interests 
affected  by  it  and  not  in  the  nature  of  the  prin- 
ciples involved. 


vi  Preface 

So  far  as  the  writer  is  aware,  no  book  has  been 
written  about  American  city  government  from 
this  point  of  view.  The  following  pages  aim 
to  show  that  it  is  the  correct  point  of  view,  both 
as  a  deduction  from  sound  political  philosophy 
and  as  a  demonstration  from  the  actual  municipal 
experience  of  Europe  and  America. 

New  York,  January,  1909. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I. 

The  City  Problem  in  Europe  and  the  United 
States    , 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  English  Municipal  System         .         .  13 

CHAPTER  III. 

The  Domination  of  Cities  by  State  Legislatures 

in  the  United  States         .          .          .          .26 

CHAPTER  IV. 

City  Government  in- England  and  the  United 

States  Contrasted 34 

CHAPTER  V. 

The  Effect  of  the  Political  Doctrines  of  "  Checks 

and  Balances  "  and  "  Short  Terms  of  Office"       50 

CHAPTER  VI. 

The  Changing  Popular  Attitude  toward  Certain 
Political    Doctrines    and    Practices   which 


viii  Contents 

PAGE 

have  Made  Bad  City  Government   Inevi- 
table in  the  United  States  61 


CHAPTER  VII. 

Growth  of  the  Popular  Determination  to  Have  a 

City  Government  Responsible  to  its  Citizens       79 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
City  Government  is  Government      .          .          ..114 

CHAPTER  IX. 
The  Relation  of  the  City  to  the  State        .         .125 

CHAPTER  X. 
The  Relation  of  the  City  to  its  Citizens      .          .140 

CHAPTER  XI. 
Pre-requisites  to  the  Self -Government  of  Cities     153 

CHAPTER  XII. 

How  the  Opportunity  for  Local  Self- Government 

must  be  Won  .          .          .          .  1 7 1 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

Importance  of  Electoral  Methods  in  Securing 

Real  Local  Self-Go vernment      .          .          .178 

CHAPTER  XIV. 
A  City's  Charter    .  .      188 


Contents  ix 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  XV. 
The  City  the  Battle-ground  of  Democracy         .     192 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

Democracy  and  Efficiency       .          .          .          .198 


Discussion  of   the  Municipal    Program  of  The 

National  Municipal  League       .          .          .      203 

Text  of  the  Municipal  Program  of  The  National 

Municipal  League    .          .          .          .          .241 

Index  .......     305 

Index  to  the  Municipal  Program      .          e          .318 


J  li^ 

IE    * 

UNIVERSITY 

i 


The  Government  of 
American  Cities 


CHAPTER  I 

THE   CITY   PROBLEM   IN   EUROPE   AND  THE 
UNITED  STATES 

WHENEVER  a  country  is  sufficiently  ad- 
vanced in  civilization  to  develop  among  its 
inhabitants  a  considerable  traffic  in  the  products 
of  their  industries,  portions  of  the  population 
will  tend  to  mass  in  convenient  centres  of  dis- 
tribution and  exchange.  Especially  is  this  the 
case  when  the  traffic  is  large,  not  only  among  the 
inhabitants  of  the  same  country  but  between 
them  and  the  people  of  other  countries.  This 
massing  of  the  people  at  centres  of  distribution 
and  exchange  creates  cities,  and  the  better  the 
facilities  of  transportation,  the  greater  is  the 
traffic  and  the  more  numerous  and  more  populous 
are  the  cities.  Cities  thus  spring  into  existence 


2       Government  of  American  Cities 

in  obedience  to  a  fundamental  economic  law. 
Whatever,  therefore,  increases  the  subjects  of 
traffic  and  the  facilities  of  transportation  is 
certain  to  add  to  the  number  and  to  the  popula- 
tion of  cities. 

Toward  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
began  the  use  of  steam  as  a  source  of  power. 
Since  that  time,  steam  has  multiplied,  almost 
beyond  reckoning,  the  products  of  human  in- 
dustry, has  increased  in  numberless  ways  the 
ease  and  speed  of  transportation,  and  has  been 
constantly  creating  new  highways  for  commerce. 
It  was  inevitable  that  under  the  impulse  of 
steam-power  cities  should  grow  rapidly  in  number 
and  make  constant  gains  in  population  over 
rural  regions.  During  the  last  twenty-five  years, 
electricity  has  added  its  potent  influence  and  the 
tendency  of  the  population  cityward  has  been 
still  further  quickened.  Nothing  is  more  certain 
than  that  in  all  countries  where  steam  and 
electricity  are  in  general  use— improving  and 
increasing  the  facilities  of  transportation,  mul- 
tiplying the  subjects  of  traffic,  enlarging  and 
emphasizing  the  influence  of  the  factory  method 
of  production — a  very  large  proportion  of  their 
inhabitants  will  be  city-dwellers.  The  phenome- 
non of  city  growth  has  not  been  an  isolated  one 
peculiar  to  the  United  States  but  has  been  common 
to  all  progressive  peoples.  The  redistribution 
of  the  population,  its  massing  in  the  centres  of 
manufacture,  distribution,  and  exchange,  has 


The  City  Problem  3 

been  even  more  striking  in  Germany  and  England 
than  in  the  United  States. i 

In  the  countries  of  Western  Europe  at  the 
opening  of  the  nineteenth  century,  very  little 
effective  attention  had  been  paid  to  the  matter 
of  city  government.  Speaking  generally,  it  was 
everywhere  unsatisfactory.  In  some  of  them  it 
was  scandalously  inefficient,  and,  in  very  many  in- 
stances, it  was  not  only  grossly  incompetent  but 
notoriously  and  to  all  appearances  hopelessly  cor- 
rupt. Yet  by  the  year  1880,  when  the  people  of 
the  United  States  were  beginning  to  be  conscious 
that  they  had  a  grave  city  problem,  Germany, 
Holland,  Belgium,  France,  and  England  each 
had  already  found  a  way  to  provide  its  cities 
with  honest,  progressive,  and  efficient  city  govern- 
ment. Each  of  these  countries  had  a  national 
government  unlike  that  of  any  of  the  others ;  in 
no  two  were  the  political  habits  and  traditions  of 
the  people  the  same .  Each  country  had  proceeded 
in  its  own  way  and  followed  its  own  methods; 
their  municipal  systems  were  widely  divergent,  yet 
their  cities  were  and  are  well  governed.  It 
is  dear  that  difference  in  form  or  structural  plan 
will  not  account  for  this  result.  There  must 
have  been  in  these  different  countries  and  cities 
the  recognition  and  observance  of  basic  principles 
upon  which  successful  city  government  must  rest. 

1  Full  details  regarding  this  movement  may  be  found  in 
A.  F.  Weber's  Growth  of  Cities  in  the  Nineteenth  Century 
(New  York,  1899). 


4       Government  of  American  Cities 

Let   us   attempt  to  discover  those  principles. 

Every  government,  of  whatever  kind  or  form, 
must,  in  order  to  act  at  all,  have  some  organ 
or  organs  whose  function  is  to  determine  how 
it  shall  act,  that  is,  its  policy,  e.  g.,  whether 
a  tax  shall  be  laid  upon  imports,  a  system 
of  highways  be  established,  a  postal  service 
be  maintained,  the  navy  be  enlarged,  harbors 
improved,  transportation  regulated,  what  shall 
be  the  monetary  standard,  what  the  powers  of 
banking  institutions  shall  be, — to  mention  only 
a  few  of  the  numberless  questions  of  public 
policy.  On  such  questions,  there  are  always 
divergent  opinions.  They  give  rise  to  divisive 
political  issues,  and  those  who  take  part  in  de- 
ciding them  frequently  become  strong  partisans. 
This  is  the  policy-determining  or  political  side 
of  the  conduct  of  the  government. 

But  when  once  the  policy  has  been  determined 
upon,  the  management  of  the  custom-houses, 
the  collection  of  the  taxes,  the  actual  construction 
of  the  highways,  the  management  of  the  postal 
service,  the  building  of  the  ships,  the  enforcement 
of  the  transportation  regulations,  the  supervision 
of  the  banking  companies,  the  maintenance  of 
the  monetary  standard  involve  no  divisive 
political  issue.  This  is  the  purely  administrative 
or,  as  it  might  be  called,  business  side  of  the 
conduct  of  government.  It  is  not  the  opinions 
of  the  members  of  its  administrative  service 
upon  matters  of  govermental  policy  which  are 


The  City  Problem  5 

important,  but  their  honesty,  zeal,  intelligence, 
and  efficiency  in  the  performance  of  the  enterprise 
which  the  government  has  decided  to  under- 
take. Whether  the  members  of  its  administrative 
service  have  or  have  not  these  qualities  is  often 
of  great  importance  to  the  government  in  de- 
termining wisely  questions  of  policy,  but  the 
decision  of  questions  of  governmental  policy  is 
no  part  of  the  duties  of  the  members  of  its  purely 
administrative  service. 

This  distinction  between  the  policy-determining, 
or  political,  and  the  purely  administrative  side 
of  government  finds  a  close  analogy  in  the  con- 
duct of  every  large  business  enterprise.  The 
conductors,  traffic  managers,  accountants,  ticket 
agents,  brakemen,  track-walkers,  superintendents 
of  a  railway  company,  do  not  decide  whether  or 
not  the  company's  resources  shall  be  used  to 
extend  the  trackage,  to  build  new  bridges,  to 
enlarge  terminals;  or  whether  additional  lines 
shall  be  leased,  or  the  capital  stock  increased, 
or  more  bonds  issued.  Their  views  on  these 
matters  of  policy  are  purely  personal  and  have 
nothing  to  do  with  the  performance  of  their 
duties  as  members  of  the  company's  adminis- 
trative staff.  The  engineer  whose  approval  or 
disapproval  of  the  company's  policy  affected  in 
even  the  slightest  degree  the  quality  of  his  en- 
gineering work  would  be  considered,  and  very 
rightly,  as  unfitted  for  his  position. 

The    importance    of    recognizing    this    funda- 


6       Government  of  American  Cities 

mental  difference  between  the  policy-determining 
and  the  administrative  sides  of  government  and 
of  keeping  the  two  quite  distinct  in  its  practical 
conduct  is  especially  marked  in  the  case  of  a 
city  government,  for  nine  tenths  of  its  activities 
are  on  the  administrative  side.  In  the  practi- 
cal conduct  of  city  government,  therefore,  the 
quality  of  its  administrative  service  is  of  a  con- 
sequence very  difficult  to  exaggerate.  Some 
way  must  be  found  to  keep  politics  out  of  its 
administrative  service,  if  the  government  is  to 
be  conducted  successfully.  Politics  in  the  ad- 
ministrative service  of  a  city  government  is  certain 
to  demoralize  that  service.  Prom  any  logical  point 
of  view,  to  permit  politics  in  the  administrative 
service  of  a  city  is  precisely  as  absurd  as  would 
be  the  attempt  to  run  a  railroad  by  selecting 
or  retaining  trainmen,  clerks,  freight-agents,  and 
engineers  according  to  their  views  upon  the 
various  questions  of  policy  that  it  was  the  func- 
tion of  the  directors  of  the  company  to  decide. 

No  one  will  dispute  the  correctness  of  these 
statements  or  the  soundness  of  their  logic  so 
long  as  we  confine  ourselves  to  the  realm  of  pure 
reason.  But  can  they  be  put  in  practice  in  this 
busy  world  which  does  not  occupy  itself  much 
with  theorizing,  and  in  which  governmental  and 
every  other  business  is  conducted  not  according 
to  any  counsel  of  perfection  but  after  any  practical 
fashion  which  seems  most  available  at  the  mo- 
ment ?  The  answer  is  found  in  the  history  of  the 


The  City  Problem  7 

city  governments  of  Germany,  Belgium,  Holland, 
Prance,  and  England.  That  these  countries  in  the 
practical  conduct  of  their  city  governments  have 
each  recognized  and  applied  these  basic  principles 
is  one  of  the  chief  reasons  why  Dresden,  Brussels, 
Amsterdam,  Lyons,  and  Manchester,  though  each 
has  a  form  of  government  widely  different  from 
all  the  others,  is  a  well  governed  municipality. 

Bulky  volumes  would  be  required  to  describe 
the  working  machinery  of  the  various  city  gov- 
ernments in  Western  Europe.  But  the  essential 
and  controlling  facts  that  explain  why,  though 
differing  so  widely  in  governmental  framework, 
they  are  nevertheless  alike  in  being  well  governed 
do  not  require  lengthy  statement. 

City  government,  like  all  government,  must 
perform  two  distinctjunctions : 

Y.  It  must  have  a  policy  adapted  to  the 
needs  of  the  people  governed;  and  since  the 
primary  purpose  of  city  government  is  to  satisfy 
the  local  needs,  the  policy  of  a  city  government 
must  be  adapted  to  the  needs  of  the  city. 

2.  It  must  provide  a  city  administrative 
service  manned  by  competent  persons  selected 
and  retained  with  no  reference  to  their  views  as 
to  the  public  policy  of  the  city  government  or 
any  other  government. 

fojjermany,  in^^ance.Jn^n^and^  in  Holland 
and  in  Belgium,  the  policy  which  controls  the 
government  of  a  cityfe  not  an  imperial  or  na- 
tional  or  otherjgxternal  policy,  but_gLJocaI  policy 


8       Government  of  American  Cities 

adapted  to  the  local  needs  of  the  city;  the  of- 
ficials of  the  city's  administrative  service  are 
selected  because  of  their  honesty  and  competence, 
and  the  limit  of  their  tenure  is  determined  by 
their  efficiency  and  good  behavior.  Thus  two 
basic  principles  which  lie  at  the  foundation  of 
the  successful  conduct  of  any  government  and 
more  especially  of  city  government  are  not  only 
recognized  theoretically  but  are  practically  applied 
and  enforced.  This  is  not  due  to  the  compulsion 
of  superior  authority,  or  in  obedience  to  specially 
enacted  statutes.  Nor  is  there  any  formal  pro- 
hibition of  the  performance  of  policy-determining 
and  administrative  functions  by  the  same  public 
officers.  It  happens  more  often  than  otherwise 
that  the  local  legislature — and  there  is  always  a 
local  legislature — in  addition  to  its  political 
policy-determining  functions  performs  through 
its  committees  important  administrative  functions 
as  well.  It  is  not  by  virtue  of  enacting  into  law 
any  special  plan  or  scheme  that  these  cities  are 
well  governed;  there  is  a  wide  variety  in  the 
formal  frameworks  of  their  governments.  But 
there  is  not  one  of  these  countries  which  has 
not  discovered  two  prerequisites  to  the  solution 
of  its  city  problem:  that  each  city  should  be 
governed  according  to  the  policy  which  suits 
its  local  needs;  and  should  have  a  trustworthy, 
competent,  and  non-political  administrative  ser- 
vice. And  each  country  in  its  own  way  has 
successfully  applied  the  discovery. 


The  City  Problem  9 

These  countries  have  also  recognized  and 
successfully  applied  another  important  principle— 
namely,  that  city  government  is  government  and 
must  therefore  be  clothed  with  power  to  satisfy 
the  local  needs  of  the  city  and  that,  in  order  to 
decide  how  it  should  exercise  its  local  power,  it 
must  have  some  policy-determining  organ  or 
organs  of  its  own. 

In  these  countries  there  is  no  granting  of 
powers  to  the  city  followed  by  curtailing  or 
perhaps  taking  them  away  altogether.  And  each 
city  government  has  a  local  legislature  locally 
elected  by  the  qualified  electors  of  the  city  in 
local  campaigns  when  members  of  the  local 
legislature  are  practically  the  only  elective  officers 
to  be  chosen.  The  superior  authority  of  the  state, 
if  there  is  occasion  for  its  exercise,  is  exercised 
through  administrative  methods,  and  is  kept 
within  well  defined  limits. 

To  sum  up,  however  divergent  the  cities  of 
Western  Europe  may  be  in  their  governmental 
form  and  framework,  in  their  practical  working: 

(1)  Each  is  a  local  government  clothed  with 
powers  to  satisfy  the  local  needs ; 

(2)  Each  is  a  local    government   conducted 
according  to  a  local  policy  locally  determined  ; 

(3)  Each  determines  its  local  policy  through 
the  election  of  a  local  legislature  in  a  local  political 
campaign  turning  upon  local  political  issues  ; 

(4)  Each  has  practically  no  elected  city  of- 
ficials except  members  of  the  city  legislature; 


io     Government  of  American  Cities 

(5)  Each  has  an  administrative  service,  the 
members  of  which  obtain  and  hold  their  positions 
irrespective  of  their  opinions  on  either  local  or 
national  political  issues; 

(6)  Each  exercises  its  local  powers  without 
arbitrary  interference  from  outside  authority; 

(7)  The    superior    authority    of    the    central 
government,  when  there  is  occasion  for  its  asser- 
tion, is  exercised  through  administrative  methods. 

There  is  not  one  of  these  principles  which  has 
not  been  directly  violated  or  heedlessly  disre- 
garded in  the  practical  conduct  of  city  govern- 
ment in  the  United  States.  The  conclusion  is 
irresistible.  Where  these  principles  have  been 
applied,  city  government  has  been  successful; 
where  they  have  been  violated  or  disregarded, 
city  government  has  been  a  failure.  Whether 
tested  by  European  or  by  American  municipal 
experience,  the  all-important  character  of  these 
principles  has  been  established.  They  are  the 
basal  underlying  principles  of  successful  city 
government. 

The  enemies  of  democracy  can  find  no  con- 
solation or  comfort  in  the  fact  that  the  cities  of 
Europe  have  been  well  governed  and  the  cities 
of  the  United  States  ill  governed.  For  what 
constitutes  democratic  government?  Not  a  par- 
ticular form  or  structural  plan,  but  the  fact 
that  the  government  represents  the  governed; 
that  it  is  conducted  according  to  policies  which 
conform  to  the  prevailing  public  opinion,  de- 


uii 
fco 


The  City  Problem  u 

liberately  formed  and  authentically  expressed  by 
those  subject  to  the  action  of  the  government; 
that  the  persons  clothed  with  governmental 
powers  are  readily  and  surely  accountable  to  the 
governed  for  the  use  of  those  powers.  Tested  by 
these  standards,  the  cities  of  Western  Europe 
are  much  nearer  to  municipal  democracy  than  the 
cities  of  the  United  States. 

The  European  city  is  largely  a  self-governing 
community;  the  American  city  has  been  a  subject 
community.  In  Europe  the  city  has  a  local 
government  clothed  with  large  powers  (and 
many  European  cities  have  governments  clothed 
with  all  the  powers)  to  meet  the  local  needs  of 
the  city;  these  powers  are  exercised  in  accord- 
ance with  a  local  public  policy  locally  determined, 
and  are  exercised  by  local  public  officials  re- 
sponsible and  responsive  to  the  local  electorate. 
The  city  in  the  United  States  has  been  a  local 
government  with  inadequate  power  to  meet  the 
local  needs  of  the  city;  and  has  had  no  effective 
means  of  compelling  the  exercise  of  even  this 
limited  power  in  accordance  with  local  public 
policy  locally  determined;  nor  has  the  local 
electorate  been  able  to  enforce  responsibility 
for  the  conduct  of  its  local  public  affairs. 

In  brief,  the  successful  city  governments  of 
Europe  have  been  striking  illustrations  of  the 
beneficent  effects  of  a  practical,  even  if  by  no 
means  complete,  application  of  the  principles  of 
democracy  to  local  government;  and  the  city 


THE 


12     Government  of  American  Cities 

governments  of  the  United  States  have  been 
striking  examples  of  the  evils  that  result  from 
the  attempt  to  conduct  local  government  in 
open  and  flagrant  violation  of  the  basic  principles 
of  democracy.  Herein  lies  the  true  explanation 
of  the  contrasting  municipal  experience  of 
Europe  and  the  United  States.  Not  the  appli- 
cation of  democratic  principles  but  the  disregard 
of  them  is  the  cause  of  municipal  misrule  in  the 
United  States.  It  is  the  constantly  clearer  dis- 
cernment of  this  fact  during  the  last  twenty-five 
years  that  gives  assurance  that  here  also  the 
cities  will  in  time  be  well  governed. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  ENGLISH  MUNICIPAL  SYSTEM  l 

TO  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  the  municipal 
history  of  England  is  perhaps  more  inform- 
ing and  suggestive  than  that  of  any  other  of  the 
countries  of  Western  Europe.  It  is  not  only  that 
the  political  traditions  and  habits  of  the  English 
people  and  of  our  own  are  derived  from  a  common 
source,  and  that  we  thus  understand  the  methods 
employed  in  England;  but  the  municipal  evils 
from  which  England  was  suffering  when  her 
present  system  of  city  government  was  established 
seventy  years  ago  were  even  more  grievous  than 
those  we  are  to-day  confronting  in  the  United 
States,  and  yet  those  evils  disappeared  under  the 
operation  of  the  Municipal  Reform  Act  adopted 
in  1835.  It  is  noteworthy,  also,  that  there  has 

i  For  detailed  information  on  the  matters  dealt  with  in 
this  chapter,  the  reader  may  be  referred  to  Redlich  and 
Hirst's  Local  Government  in  England  (2  vols.,  London,  1904); 
to  Webb's  English  Local  Government  (3  vols.,  London,  1906- 
1908) ;  to  the  chapters  on  municipal  administration  in  Lowell's 
Government  of  England  (2  vols.,  New  York,  1908);  and  to 
Munro's  Government  of  European  Cities  (New  York,  1909), 
Chap.  III. 

13 


1 4     Government  of  American  Cities 

been  no  change  in  principle  or  method  since 
that  act  was  adopted.  The  English  system  has 
been  eminently  stable.  From  time  to  time  new 
laws  have  been  passed  upon  the  subject  of  mu- 
nicipal government,  but  these  have  served  to 
strengthen  the  original  act  and  to  enlarge  the 
area  of  its  application.  In  1882,  the  law  of 
1835  an<^  these  subsequent  statutes  were  recast 
into  a  general  municipal  code  compact  in  form 
and  containing  269  sections. 

In  1835  each  English  city  had  its  special  charter. 
There  was  the  same  bewildering  variety  of  struc- 
tural plan  that  is  found  in  the  United  States. 
Misgovernment  and  inefficiency  were  universal. 
Corruption  was  very  prevalent.  In  the  conduct 
of  city  government  the  will  of  the  governed 
found  little  and  usually  no  expression. 1  To-day, 
more  than  one  half  of  the  inhabitants  of  England 
and  Wales,  exclusive  of  London  which  has  a 
special  government  of  its  own,  dwell  in  more 
than  three  hundred  cities,  large  and  small,  each  of 
which  is  to  a  marked  extent  a  genuine  self- 
governing  community  that  conducts  its  local 
affairs  successfully  under  the  provisions  of  one 
general  municipal  corporations  act.  And,  ex- 
cluding London,  this  could  have  been  said  of 
every  English  city  at  any  time  since  the  system 
inaugurated  by  the  Municipal  Reform  Act  of 

1  See,  for  abundant  evidence  on  these  points,  the  Report 
of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Municipal  Corporations,  in  the 
Parliamentary  Papers  for  1835. 


The  English  Municipal  System      15 

1835  was  fairly  established.  This  does  not  mean 
that  each  city  is  exactly  like  every  other  in  the 
details  of  its  administrative  organization, — each 
city  arranges  these  in  its  own  discretion, — but 
it  does  mean  that  the  English  system  of  city 
government  is  at  once  simple  and  comprehensive, 
that  it  has  successfully  withstood  the  searching 
practical  test  of  daily  experience  under  every 
variety  of  circumstance  for  seventy  years,  and 
1  has  proved  itself  admirably  adapted  at  every 
stage  of  their  growth  to  the  needs  of  cities  of 
widely  varying  characteristics,  small  and  large, 
maritime  and  inland. 

The  fundamentals  of  the  English  Municipal 
Code,  its  ground  plan,  may  be  stated  briefly. 
]  Each  city  is  a  corporation  clothed  with  large 
rjlocal  powers  of  government.  These  powers  are 
^»  exercised  by  a  board,  locally  selected  in  the 
following  manner :  The  city  is  ordinarily  divided 
into  districts,  in  each  of  which  the  qualified 
voters  elect  three  members  of  the  board,  one 
each  year  for  a  term  of  three  years.  These 
elected  members,  called  councillors,  choose  ad- 
ditional members  of  the  board  to  the  number 
of  one  third,  called  aldermen.  The  aldermen 
are  chosen  for  a  term  of  six  years,  and  one  half 
retire  triennially.  For  example,  if  there  are 
twelve  councillors,  these  choose  four  aldermen, 
two  each  third  year  for  a  term  of  six  years.  The 
full  board  of  councillors  and  aldermen  is  called 
the  Council  and  chooses  one  of  their  own  num- 


1 6     Government  of  American  Cities 

her — or  an  outsider,  although  this  is  not  usual 
— as  Mayor.  The  Mayor,  save  that  he  is  titular 
president  of  the  Council  and  is  ex  officio  a  magis- 
trate, has  no  greater  power  than  any  other  mem- 
ber. The  Code  requires  the  Council  to  choose  a 
town  clerk  and  a  treasurer  and  to  appoint  from 
its  own  membership  a  " Watch  Committee"  to 
control  local  police  matters.  *  Such  other  officials 
as  may  be  desired  or  needed  are  appointed  and 
removed  and  their  salaries  and  tenures  fixed  by 
the  Council,  which  also  has  full  power  to  meet 
every  need  or  phase  of  local  administration. 

In  substance  and  in  effect  the  English  system 
commits  the  conduct  of  the  local  public  affairs  of 
each  community  to  a  central  committee,  or  board 
selected  by  the  locality  to  carry  out  the  local  will. 
There  is  no  lack  of  politics  or  political  partisan- 
ship under  the  system,  but  the  politics  are  mainly 
local  politics  and  the  heat  of  the  political  cam- 
paigns is  excited  by  local  issues.  The  local 
election  never  occurs  at  the  same  time  as  any 
other  election  and  there  is  only  one  elective 
office  arousing  any  political  interest,  the  council- 
lorship.2  The  voter  has  therefore  only  to  con- 
sider and  decide  upon  the  merits  of  candidates 
for  this  one  office. 

The  election  methods  are  very  simple.     The 

1  The  Education  Act  of  1902  has  also  provided  for  an 
"Education  Committee"  to  control  the  schools. 

2  Two   auditors   and   two   revising   assessors  are   elected 
annually  by  the  city  at  large. 


The  English  Municipal  System      17 

candidate  is  nominated  by  filing  with  the  town 
clerk  a  paper  upon  which  one  elector  proposes, 
another  elector  seconds,  and  eight  additional 
electors  endorse  the  candidate.  When  there  is 
no  burning  local  issue  it  sometimes  happens 
that  only  one  such  nominating  paper  is  filed; 
in  which  case  no  formal  election  is  held  and  the 
candidate  named  in  the  one  nominating  paper 
is  declared  elected.  This  has  occurred  very 
frequently.  The  honesty  and  purity  of  the 
electoral  methods  are  amply  safeguarded.  The 
ballot  is  a  secret  official  ballot  printed  at  public 
expense  and  furnished  the  voter  within  the 
polling  place.  It  contains  the  names  of  all 
the  candidates  alphabetically  arranged  under  the 
title  of  the  office,  without  any  designation  of  the 
political  parties  to  which  the  nominees  belong. 
The  voter  goes  into  a  private  booth  and  marks 
his  preference,  then  comes  out  of  the  booth  and 
deposits  his  ballot  with  the  election  officer.  The 
counting  and  canvassing  of  the  ballots  are  ad- 
mirably provided  for. 

In  practice,  the  members  of  the  Council  who 
render  conspicuously  good  service  to  the  locality 
are  sure  of  a  long  tenure.  They  are  elected 
and  re-elected  term  after  term.  Instances  are 
numerous  of  members  who  have  been  in  office 
continuously  for  twenty  years  or  even  longer. 1 

1  See  Professor  F.  J.  Goodnow's  article  on  "The  British 
Municipality"  in  the  recent  Report  of  the  National  Civic 
Federation  (3  vols.,  New  York,  1907),  vol.  i. 


1 8     Government  of  American  Cities 

The  aldermen  are  usually  men  who  have  won 
previous  distinction  as  councillors.  \S 

The  opportunities  afforded  by  membership  in 
these  local  boards  have  from  the  beginning  at- 
tracted men  of  eminent  ability,  and  the  English 
city  commands  the  services  of  highly  competent 
and  public-spirited  men  in  its  Council.  It  has 
been  natural,  therefore,  that  the  powers  granted 
to  cities  in  the  original  Municipal  Reform  Act  have 
never  been  curtailed  and  that  subsequent  legis- 
lation has  granted  additional  powers.  There  is 
now  scarcely  any  matter  of  important  local 
concern  except  poor  relief  which  is  not  within 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  city  Council. 

There  has  been  another  and  most  important 
result.  The  men  of  ability  and  reputation,  elected 
to  these  local  boards  and  charged  with  full  re- 
sponsibility to  the  local  electorate  for  the  exercise 
of  large  powers  that  directly  and  vitally  affect 
the  local  interests,  have  developed  local  adminis- 
trative organizations  based  upon  a  thorough-going 
application  of  the  merit  principle  in  appointment, 
tenure,  and  promotion.  This  exclusion  of  politics 
from  administration  is  the  more  noteworthy 
because  it  is  due  neither  to  any  legal  compulsion, 
nor  to  any  formal  or  physical  separation  of  the 
executive  from  the  legislative  department  of 
the  city  government,  nor  to  the  mandate  of  any 
superior  authority. 

The  Council  of  an  English  city  through  its 
committees  directs  the  entire  city  administration. 


The  English  Municipal  System      19 

It  has  complete  power  to  organize  the  city's 
administrative  service  in  any  manner  it  chooses; 
decides  into  what  departments  that  service  shall 
be  divided,  establishes  the  jurisdiction  of  each, 
and  fixes  the  duties,  salaries,  and  tenures  of  the 
department  officials.  There  is  no  administrative 
matter  so  large  as  to  be  beyond  the  scope  of  the 
Council's  power  or  so  minute  as  to  escape  its 
control.  The  Council  has  lacked  neither  the 
power  nor  the  opportunity  to  use  the  adminis- 
trative service  for  Apolitical"  ends;  for  the 
entire  "patronage"  of  the  public  service  of  an 
English  city  is  at  the  absolute  disposal  of  its 
Council,  every  civil  servant  of  the  city  is  a  sub- 
ordinate of  the  Council  without  fixed  term  and 
removable  at  its  pleasure,  and  no  law  prevents 
compelling  every  one  of  them  to  be  an  adherent 
of  the  political  views  held  by  the  majority  of  the 
Council. 

Neither  has  the  Council  been  persuaded  to 
keep  the  political  and  administrative  sides  of 
the  city  government  thus  entirely  distinct  because 
of  any  philosophical  views  on  the  nature  of 
government  and  the  differing  nature  of  its  political 
and  administrative  functions.  The  exclusion  of 
politics  from  administration  has  been  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  members  of  the  Council  could  be 
held  personally  accountable  by  the  local  electo- 
rate for  the  success  or  failure  of  the  local  govern- 
ment. History  shows  that  the  possession  of 
power,  for  the  use  of  which  there  is  an  easily 


20     Government  of  American  Cities 

enforceable  accountability  to  the  persons  granting 
the  power,  stimulates  its  possessor  to  study  the 
interests  of  those  who  have  entrusted  him  with 
the  power  and  who  may  take  it  away.  This 
principle  has  found  full  play  under  the  English 
Municipal  Code.  The  members  of  the  Council 
are  put  there  by  the  local  electorate  to  run  the 
city  government  and,  under  the  simple  electoral 
system  that  has  been  described,  cannot  escape 
full  responsibility  for  success  or  failure.  The 
responsibility  rests  upon  them  and  upon  nobody 
else.  It  was  inevitable,  therefore,  that  the  able 
men  who  constituted  the  Council  of  an  English 
city  should  recognize  that  in  the  administrative 
service  of  a  city,  as  of  any  other  corporation  of 
which  they  were  the  directors,  the  views  and 
opinions  of  a  member  of  the  administrative  staff 
upon  questions  of  corporate  policy  are  matters 
of  indifference  when  the  faithful  and  efficient 
performance  of  his  administrative  duties  does 
not  depend  upon  them.  In  the  administrative 
service  of  the  English  city,  the  Council  has  seen 
to  it,  as  a  matter  of  plain  business  sense,  that 
every  official  should  be  selected,  retained,  and 
promoted  for  efficiency  and  good  conduct  without 
reference  to  his  political  opinions.  And  this  is 
true  not  merely  of  one  English  city  but  of  all 
English  cities  under  the  operation  of  the  English 
Municipal  Code. 

The  fundamental  principles  of  democracy  have 
been  applied  to  the  solution  of  the  problem  of 


The  English  Municipal  System      21 

city  government  with  greater  thoroughness  in 
England  than  in  any  other  country.  The  pre- 
vailing local  public  opinion  on  questions  of  local 
policy  finds  its  expression  in  the  Council,  which 
is  clothed  with  all  the  local  governmental  powers 
possessed  by  the  city  and  whose  members  are 
responsible  to  the  local  electorate  for  the  exercise 
of  those  powers. 

The  central  government  in  England  has  found  it 
entirely  possible  to  secure  from  the  cities  due  re- 
cognition of  its  superior  authority  in  proper  cases, 
and  at  the  same  time  to  preserve  their  character 
as  local  self-governing  communities.  The  problem 
has  been  solved  by  the  simple  device  of  exercising 
the  control  of  the  central  government  through 
administrative  instead  of  political  agencies.  In 
legal  theory  the  Parliament  in  England  has  even 
more  complete  authority  over  cities  than  has 
the  State  Legislature  in  the  United  States.1 
There  is  not  a  section  of  the  Municipal  Code 
which  Parliament  may  not  alter  to  suit  its  own 
views.  And  there  is  no  grant  of  power  to  a  city 
which  Parliament  may  not  withdraw  or  modify. 
The  English  cities,  in  legal  theory,  are  even  more 
liable  to  the  evils  of  "special  legislation"  than 
are  the  cities  of  the  United  States.1  But  in 
England  central  administrative  boards  have  been 
established  with  general  jurisdiction  over  all 
matters  as  to  which  the  central  authority  of  the 

i  No  written  constitution  restricts  the  activity  of  Parlia- 
ment. 


22     Government  of  American  Cities 

state  over  the  locality  is  to  be  exercised;  and, 
where  parliamentary  action  is  necessary,  it  fol- 
lows the  lines  laid  down  by  these  non-political 
administrative  boards,  whose  expert  and  dis- 
interested advice  is  frankly  admitted  to  furnish 
much  better  and  safer  guidance  for  the  determina- 
tion of  this  class  of  questions  than  the  opinions 
of  members  of  Parliament  who  have  been  elected 
because  of  their  views  on  national  political  issues. 
Here  are  some  contrasting  examples  of  the 
methods  of  exercising  the  authority  of,  the  state 
over  cities  in  England  and  in  the  United  States : 
In  both  countries  it  is  an  integral  part  of  the 
state  policy  that  the  power  of  a  city  to  incur 
debt  should  be  limited.  In  the  United  States, 
this  is  accomplished  by  provisions  in  the  state 
constitution  or  by  statutes  restricting  the  debt- 
incurring  power  of  the  city,  usually  to  a  definite 
percentage  of  the  assessed  valuation  of  taxable 
property  within  the  city  limits.  New  York 
City,  for  instance,  found  it  impossible,  because 
of  such  a  constitutional  restriction,  to  make 
suitable  provision  for  the  additional  water  supply 
demanded  by  its  rapidly  growing  needs  without 
first  securing  an  amendment  to  the  state  con- 
stitution. This  requires,  in  New  York,  favorable 
action  by  two  successive  legislatures  and  a  sub- 
sequent submission  to  the  voters  of  the  entire 
state  for  approval  or  rejection.  Yet  the  experience 
of  the  city  had  demonstrated  that  its  revenues 
from  the  users  of  water  had  always  been  more 


The  English  Municipal  System      23 

i 
than  sufficient  to  pay  principal  and  income  of 

all  bonds  issued  for  a  water  supply.  The  necessary 
constitutional  amendment  was  finally  secured; 
but  only  at  the  end  of  a  long  and  costly  campaign 
lasting  for  years  and  beset  with  difficulties,-— 
the  city  in  the  meantime  barely  escaping  the 
disaster  of  having  its  water  supply  pass  under 
the  control  of  a  private  monopoly. 

In  England,  no  constitutional  restriction  or 
act  of  Parliament  would  stand  in  the  way.  The 
city  authorities  would  have  submitted  the  project 
for  a  water  supply  to  an  administrative  board 
(the  Local  Government  Board)  representing  the 
central  authority  of  the  state.  This  board, 
after  due  public  investigation,  including,  when 
desirable,  the  taking  of  testimony,  and  after 
weighing  all  the  reasons  presented  for  and  against 
the  project,  would  have  rendered  its  decision. 
If  an  act  of  Parliament  had  been  needed  to  carry 
its  decision  into  effect  the  act  would  have  been 
passed  as  a  matter  of  course.  The  proceedings 
would  have  been  prompt  and  the  fairness  of 
the  decision  unquestioned.  In  this  way,  many 
English  cities  have  obtained  their  magnificent 
water- works. 

Nor  does  the  difference  end  here.  The  bonds 
issued  by  a  city  in  the  United  States  to  acquire 
the  property  needed  and  to  build  and  equip  the 
water  system  are  regulated  as  to  their  term, 
their  sinking  fund,  their  rate  of  interest,  and  in 
all  other  essential  particulars  by  a  rigid  statute. 


24     Government  of  American  Cities 

* 

The  special  conditions  of  the  undertaking,  phys- 
ical and  financial,  are  allowed  to  have  no  in- 
fluence. In  England,  as  a  rule,  some  central 
administrative  board  would,  in  connection  with 
the  local  authorities,  go  into  these  with  careful 
detail,  would  decide  the  amount  to  be  raised,  the 
period  within  which  the  bonds  must  be  paid,  and 
how  the  money  for  their  repayment  should  be 
raised.  The  English  methods  are  assimilated  as 
closely  as  possible  to  those  of  intelligent  private 
financiers. 1 

Or  suppose  that  a  city  wishes  to  undertake 
some  new  function  and  for  this  purpose  needs 
the  grant  by  the  state  of  additional  power,  in 
order,  for  instance,  to  manufacture  and  supply 
gas,  or  to  own  and  control  its  street  railways. 
In  the  United  States,  the  city  would  have  to 
apply  to  the  state  legislature  for  the  grant  of 
power,  and  the  question  whether  the  city  should 
or  should  not  undertake  this  new  function  and 
the  conditions  under  which  it  should  be  allowed 
to  do  so,  if  at  all,  would  become  at  once  matters 
of  partisan  political  strife.  In  England  the  or- 
dinary course  would  be  for  the  city  to  apply 
to  a  central  administrative  board  (the  Board  of 
Trade),  which  would  make  a  thorough  and  im- 
partial investigation.  The  financial  resources  of 
the  city  would  be  ascertained,  the  locality  would 

i  The  details  may  be  conveniently  found  in  the  article  on 
"Loans"  in  the  Encyclopedia  of  Local  Government  Law  (6 
vols.,  London,  1906-1908). 


The  English  Municipal  System      25 

be  visited  by  one  of  the  board's  officers  and  an 
opportunity  given  for  all  who  desired  it  to  be 
heard.  There  would  be  complete  publicity  at 
every  stage  and  every  detail  would  be  examined 
with  care.  If  the  final  result  should  be  favorable 
to  the  city's  application,  the  central  administrative 
board,  in  the  cases  in  which  it  did  not  have 
already  sufficient  authority  to  act,  would  itself 
prepare  the  appropriate  bill  and  place  it  before 
Parliament,  which  would  ordinarily  approve  the 
action  of  the  central  board  as  a  matter  of  course.1 
The  English  plan  insures  the  best  expert  advice 
and  service  and,  what  is  even  more  important, 
practically  eliminates  politics  from  the  supervision 
of  local  affairs  by  the  central  government. 

The  records  of  these  central  administrative 
boards  and  the  long  service  of  their  trained 
assistants  make  available  for  each  city  the  ex- 
perience of  all  the  cities.  This  is  not  only  of 
the  greatest  value  in  reaching  a  wise  decision, 
but  avoids  the  risk  of  having  the  grant  of  power 
to  the  city  embodied  in  a  bill  containing  ambiguous 
or  contradictory  phrases  which  may  afterwards 
give  rise  to  disputes  and  litigation. 

1  If  the  board  disapproves  the  application,  the  city  may 
and  occasionally  does  apply  to  Parliament  directly,  but 
favorable  action  by  Parliament  against  the  opposition  of 
a  central  administrative  board  is  very  rare. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  DOMINATION  OF  CITIES  BY  STATE  LEGISLATURES 
IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

IN  theory  of  law,  a  city  in  the  United  States 
is  a  corporation,  the  creature  of  the  state 
legislature.  It  has  only  powers  enumerated  by 
the  legislature.  It  has  no  powers  not  enumer- 
ated in  legislative  grants.  The  legislature  gives 
and  the  legislature  takes  away.  The  only  re- 
strictions upon  the  absolute  dominion  of  the 
legislature  over  the  city,  apart  from  public 
opinion,  are  such  as  may  be  in  the  state  con- 
stitution. The  authoritative  control  of  the 
city's  public  affairs  is  not  in  its  citizens,  but  in 
the  legislature.  The  city  controls  its  own  affairs 
only  by  suffrance  of  the  legislature.  The  real 
seat  of  authority  is  not  in  the  city,  but  in  the 
state  legislature.  The  legal  validity  of  an  act 
by  the  city,  e.g.  issuing  its  bonds,  contracting 
for  water- works,  for  a  sewer  or  a  pavement,  reg- 
ulating the  use  of  its  streets,  is  not  determined 
by  the  will  or  expressed  desires  of  its  citizens, 
but  by  the  will  of  the  legislature  as  set  forth  in 
some  statute.  The  city  is  not  merely  the  creature 

26 


Domination  by  State  Legislatures   27 

of  the  legislative  will,  it  may  be  and  often  is 
the  helpless  victim  of  legislative  caprice. 

In  the  exercise  of  the  powers  granted  it,  a 
city  must  not  only  keep  strictly  within  the  limits 
set  by  the  state  legislature,  but  it  can  follow 
only  such  administrative  methods  as  the  legisla- 
ture prescribes.  The  only  will  permitted  it  is 
a  mere  reflex  of  the  legislative  pleasure.  The 
legislature  may  regulate  down  to  the  minutest 
detail  the  methods  and  personnel  of  its  adminis- 
tration. This  street  may  have  a  railroad,  that 
one  may  not ;  this  street  shall  be  thirty  feet  wide, 
this  paved  with  asphalt,  that  with  cobbles;  this 
head  of  a  city  department  be  elected,  that  ap- 
pointed; this  city  official  have  a  term  of  three 
years,  that  one  year,  another  an  indefinite  term. 

A  city  is  created  by  the  state  legislature  with 
only  such  governmental  powers  as  the  legislature 
chooses  to  confer,  and  it  must  exercise  its  powers 
only  in  such  manner  and  through  such  agencies 
as  the  legislature  prescribes.  Is  a  new  power 
necessary  or  desirable,  or  a  change  wished  in 
the  methods  by  which  it  is  permitted  to  exercise 
any  of  its  powers?  The  state  legislature  and 
the  state  legislature  alone  can  grant  the  new 
power  or  make  the  change  of  method. 

The  economic  development  of  the  country  has 
been  constantly  calling  an  increasing  number  of 
new  cities  into  existence  and  constantly  enlarging 
the  area  and  the  population  of  cities  already 
established  and  consequently  the  field  of  their 


28     Government  of  American  Cities 

activities.  This  irresistible  tendency  of  modern 
industrial  civilization  to  mass  population  at 
trade  and  manufacturing  centres,  combined  with 
the  legal  subordination  of  the  city  to  the  central 
authority  of  the  state  legislature,  has  furnished 
almost  boundless  opportunity  for  misdirected 
legislative  energy.  The  rural  district  has  become 
a  town;  the  town,  a  small  city;  the  small  city, 
a  large  one ;  the  large  city,  a  metropolis,  all  with 
startling  rapidity.  At  each  stage  of  growth  the 
need  of  exercising  new  governmental  activities 
has  been  felt  in  order  to  satisfy  the  local  wants, 
and  the  state  legislature  has  been  called  upon  to 
confer  the  requisite  power  or  to  act  directly 
through  boards  and  commissions  of  its  own 
appointment.  At  each  stage  also  the  administra- 
tion of  the  general  laws  of  the  state  within  the 
city's  limits  and  the  satisfaction  of  the  local 
needs  have  demanded  increasing  attention,  more 
administrative  officials,  and  changes  of  adminis- 
trative plan  in  adaptation  to  the  new  conditions. 
The  state  legislature  has  been  called  upon  to  de- 
vise and  control  this  administrative  development. 
This  process  has  been  going  on  for  more  than 
half  a  century  and  is  still  going  on  before  our 
eyes  to-day.  Both  the  process  itself  and  the 
results  of  it  may  be  characterized  as  an  attempt 
by  the  state  legislature  to  conduct  the  municipal 
government. 

The  helpless  legal  position  of  the  city  and  its 
need  of  frequent  application  to  the  state  legisla- 


Domination  by  State  Legislatures   29 

ture  as  the  real  source  of  power  had  been  so 
continuously  urgent  that,  until  near  the  close 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  local  self-government 
in  the  United  States  scarcely  existed,  either  in 
the  sense  of  direct  management  of  its  local  interests 
by  the  city's  own  citizens  without  outside  inter- 
ference, or  in  the  sense  of  the  administration  of 
its  local  scheme  of  government.  Our  people  had 
become  so  accustomed  to  this  absolute  dependence 
upon  the  state  legislature  that  there  was  very 
little  genuine  local  public  spirit.  The  constant 
resort  *  to  and  interference  by  the  legislature  had 

1  There  has  been  a  vast  amount  of  legislation  enacted  at 
the  request  of  members  of  the  state  legislature  coming  from 
the  city  affected  or  of  private  citizens  residing  there.  This 
has  been  sometimes  urged  as  showing  that  the  city  secures 
from  the  legislature  the  kind  of  local  government  which  its 
citizens  desire,  and  that  local  misrule  has  been  in  large  meas- 
ure due  to  too  much  deference  by  the  state  legislature  to  the 
wishes  of  the  locality. 

This  line  of  reasoning  assumes  that  such  legislation  was  in 
response  to  a  request  from  the  whole  community,  when  in 
fact  it  was  enacted  to  gratify  the  wishes  of  a  few,  often  a 
very  few,  of  its  members.  It  also  loses  sight  of  the  fact  that 
there  was  and  could  be  no  effective  responsibility  to  the 
people  of  the  city  for  enacting  the  legislation.  Responsibility 
for  it  is  diffused  among  legislators  coming  from  every  part 
of  the  state,  and  such  of  them  as  come  from  the  city  affected 
are  not  elected  by  the  city  at  large  but  by  districts,  usually 
"safe"  districts. 

Legislation  affecting  all  the  people  of  a  city  enacted  at  the 
instance  of  only  some  of  them  is  at  best  a  perilous  practice. 
The  city  is  not  responsible  for  it,  however  earnestly  some 
members  of  the  community  may  have  desired  or  promoted 
it.  It  has  been  one  of  the  favorite  methods  of  exploiting  our 
cities  for  personal  and  partisan  political  ends. 


30     Government  of  American  Cities 

grown  to  seem  perfectly  natural  and,  as  it  were, 
inevitable  in  the  conduct  of  municipal  govern- 
ment. The  cities  were  governed  from  without, 
not  from  within;  such  governmental  powers  as 
they  might  have  were  exercised  not  through 
methods  and  agencies  selected  by  themselves  but 
those  established  by  outside  authority.  They 
were  not  self-governing  communities,  free  to  ap- 
ply their  own  remedies  to  their  own  ills  and  to 
learn  by  experience  how  to  work  out  an  admin- 
istration adapted  to  their  local  needs. 1 

Familiar  as  are  these  facts  and  elementary  as 
are  the  legal  propositions  that  have  been  stated, 
their  tremendous  consequences  in  American  mu- 
nicipal history  cannot  be  exaggerated.  They 
have  constituted  one  of  the  fundamental  reasons 
for  the  corruption  of  legislatures,  for  the  mis- 
management of  our  cities,  and  for  the  lack  of 
municipal  patriotism.  There  has  been  no  way 
to  prevent  or  to  punish  the  meddling  by  the 
legislature  with  the  local  policy  and  administration 
of  a  city  government.  The  absolute  dominion 
of  the  state  legislatures  over  our  cities  has  made 
the  local  voter  feel  helpless  and  hopeless  and 
has  stifled  local  patriotism.  The  exercise  of 
power  without  accountability  to  those  subject 
to  its  exercise  is  a  gross  violation  of  a  self-evi- 
dent principle  of  sound  politics.  The  state 
legislature  could  make  and  unmake  at  will  the 

i  See  Goodnow's  Municipal  Home  Rule,  N.  Y.,  1903. 


Domination  by  State  Legislatures   31 

structural  plan  of  city  government;  it  could  or- 
ganize, reorganize  and  disorganize  local  methods 
of  administration;  make  the  positions,  many 
times  more  numerous  in  the  public  service  of 
the  city  than  of  the  state,  the  partisan  spoils 
of  the  political  party  which  for  the  time  being 
might  be  in  the  ascendant,  not  in  the  city  but 
in  the  state  legislature.  What  wonder  that  such 
power,  coupled  with  the  temptation  to  use  it 
for  party  advantage  and  with  no  enforceable 
responsiblity  to  the  citizens  of  the  city  affected, 
has  led  to  the  greatest  abuses  ? 

Except,  however,  that  our  senses  had  been 
dulled  by  long  use  to  the  usurpation  by  state 
legislatures  of  the  functions  of  local  government, 
such  a  legislative  abuse  of  power  would  have 
been  impossible.  Even  now  many  residents  of 
our  older  states  find  it  very  difficult  to  conceive 
of  a  city  as  a  self-governing  community  un- 
hindered and  unhelped  by  the  state  legislature. 
But  the  preposterous  and  utterly  impracticable 
character  of  the  effort  to  conduct  local  govern- 
ment by  a  state  legislature  will  become  at  once 
apparent  if  we  will  imagine  state  lines  to  be 
erased  and  the  national  legislature  at  Washington 
attempting  to  decide  the  policy  and  order  the 
administration  of  every  city  in  the  Union,  from 
the  small  urban  centres  having  but  a  few  thou- 
sand inhabitants  to  the  great  metropolitan  cities 
of  Chicago  and  New  York  with  a  population 
mounting  into  the  millions.  Were  the  Congress 


32     Government  of  American  Cities 

constantly  intermeddling  with  the  local  policy 
and  internal  administration  of  Boston  and  San 
Francisco,  Chicago  and  New  Orleans,  Philadelphia 
and  St.  Louis,  New  York  and  Omaha  and  the 
other  cities  of  the  country  large  and  small,  the 
absurdity  and  iniquity  of  such  a  course  would 
be  plain  to  every  one.  It  violates  the  most 
cherished  principle  of  free  government.  The 
very  idea  of  it  is  repulsive.  We  instinctively 
revolt  at  it  and  are  quick  to  see  that  it  is  foreign 
to  the  spirit  of  our  institutions,  that  local 
self-government  is  necessary  to  their  successful 
or  long  continuance.  Yet  there  is  no  essential 
difference  in  principle  between  the  case  supposed 
and  the  actual  course  that  has  been  followed  in 
Pennsylvania,  for  example,  in  New  York,  in  Ohio, 
and  in  many  other  states,  whose  legislatures 
have  constantly  intermeddled  with  the  local 
policy  and  internal  administration  of  their  nu- 
merous cities,  large  and  small.  Such  an  abuse  of 
power  would  be  monstrous  and  repellent  to 
every  self-respecting  citizen  of  an  English  city. 
It  would  be  difficult  for  him  to  grasp  even  the 
idea  of  its  possibility.  In  a  broad  general  sense 
it  may  be  said  that  the  English  city  is  self-govern- 
ing, while  the  city  in  the  United  States  is  state- 
governed.  The  citizens  of  Birmingham  govern 
Birmingham,  the  legislature  of  Pennsylvania 
governs  Pittsburg. 

A  really  self-governing  city  is  a  school  in  civic 
patriotism;  the  city  in  the  United  States,  with 


Domination  by  State  Legislatures  33 

the  constantly  uninvited  intervention  by  the  leg- 
islature in  its  local  governmental  affairs,  is  de- 
structive of  the  spirit  of  true  democracy  and 
is  an  example  of  cumbrous,  expensive,  and  in- 
efficient administration. 


CHAPTER  IV 

CITY  GOVERNMENT   IN   ENGLAND   AND  THE   UNITED 
STATES  CONTRASTED 

FROM  the  landing  of  the  original  settlers  in 
Jamestown  and  Plymouth  in  the  early  part 
of  the  seventeenth  century  till  the  middle  of  the 
nineteenth  century  the  industrial  and  economic 
conditions  in  what  is  now  the  United  States 
were  not  favorable  to  the  creation  of  cities. 
Rapidly  as  the  population  increased,  especially 
after  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
the  country  was  but  sparsely  occupied.  There 
was  always  an  immense  expanse  of  unused  ter- 
ritory and  the  tendency  was  rather  to  scatter 
than  to  concentrate  the  habitations  of  the  people. 
The  population  was  mainly  rural  and  the  prevailing 
occupation  was  agricultural.  There  were  many 
villages  and  small  towns,  but  the  roads  were 
poor,  the  means  of  transportation  primitive,  and 
manufactures  were  carried  on  mainly  by  water- 
power  in  small  isolated  establishments.  (/Even 
as  late  as  the  year  1850,  except  at  a  few  harbors 
on  the  Atlantic  seaboard  and  in  one  or  two 
favorable  situations  on  the  banks  of  large  rivers, 

34 


Contrast  with  English  System      35 

the  United  States  had  almost  no  cities  and  these 
were  rather  overgrown  towns  than  cities  in  the 
sense  in  which  we  now  understand  the  word. 
The  population  in  them  was  not  closely  com- 
pacted and  the  problems  of  city  administration 
which  have  since  attained  such  magnitude  either 
did  not  exist  at  all  or  existed  only  in  rudimentary 
form.1 

During  the  next  three  decades  the  industrial 
and  economic  conditions  in  the  United  States 
changed  completely.  By  the  year  1880,  the 
forces  driving  the  people  cityward  were  in  full 
swing  and  cities  were  multiplying  in  numbers 
and  growing  in  population  with  a  rapidity  that 
could  not  fail  to  attract  the  attention  of  even 
careless  observers. 

It  was  about  1850  that  the  use  of  steam  as 
a  source  of  power  began  to  be  a  potent  factor 
in  the  economic  development  of  the  United  States 
and  that  the  use  of  the  telegraph  as  a  means  of 
intercommunication  began.  By  the  year  1880 
the  railroads  had  already  spanned  the  continent 
and  had  provided  for  mail  service,  travel,  and 
traffic  a  multitude  of  highways  enormously  su- 
perior in  speed,  in  comfort,  and 'in  capacity  to 
even  the  best  of  turnpike  roads  and  stage  coaches ; 

*  In  1800,  there  were  in  the  United  States  but  six  cities 
or  towns  having  as  many  as  8,000  inhabitants.  Their  com- 
bined population  was  210,873.  Philadelphia  led  with 
69,403;  New  York  (county)  followed  with  60,489.  In  1850 
there  were  but  six  cities  with  a  population  in  excess  of  100,000 
and  but  twenty-four  having  more  than  20,000. 


36     Government  of  American  Cities 

and  a  network  of  telegraph  wires  was  rapidly 
spreading  over  the  country.  The  economic  state 
of  1880  was  entirely  new  and  wholly  different 
from  the  economic  state  of  1850.  The  political 
state  had  changed  but  little;  its  equipment  and 
methods,  however  well  suited  they  may  have 
been  to  the  conditions  prevailing  in  1850,  were 
altogether  inadequate  to  meet  the  needs  of  1880. 
This  was  true  of  the  national  government  but 
especially  of  city  government. 

It  was  not  until  during  the  period  from  1880 
to  1890  that  any  considerable  number  of  persons 
in  the  United  States  began  to  think  of  city  govern- 
ment as  a  grave  or  vital  matter.  This  was  due 
not  alone  to  the  fact  already  pointed  out  that 
prior  to  1850  there  were  almost  no  cities  and 
therefore,  of  course,  no  city  problem;  but  to  the 
fact  that  the  conflict  between  slavery  and  freedom 
had  already  in  1850  divided  the  country  into 
two  hostile  camps.  The  economic  and  industrial 
changes  that  were  redistributing  the  population 
and  concentrating  it  in  urban  centres  took  place 
during  the  very  period  when  men's  minds,  so 
far  as  political  questions  were  concerned,  were 
wholly  occupied  by  this  absorbing  conflict,  which 
culminated  in  years  of  civil  war  and  engendered  a 
fierce  and  even  bigoted  partisanship  that  prevented 
until  the  coming  of  another  generation  any  pro- 
longed and  fruitful  consideration  of  the  newer  pro- 
blems or  even  an  effective  appreciation  that  there 
were  new  political  problems  of  serious  importance. 


Contrast  with  English  System      37 

Thus  it  came  about  that  when  we  were  finally 
compelled  by  force  of  circumstances  to  begin  to 
pay  attention  in  the  United  States  to  city  ad- 
ministration, we  were  singularly  helpless.  We 
had  never  given  serious  attention  to  the  subject. 
The  cities  had  come  upon  us  una wares.  They 
had  been  considered  as  merely  subordinate  civil 
divisions  of  the  state,  and  the  public  affairs  of 
cities,  like  all  matters  in  the  sphere  of  politics, 
had  been  treated  as  mere  incidents  of  the  partisan 
struggle  for  control  of  the  national  government. 
City  government,  as  a  problem  requiring  serious 
thought  or  as,  in  any  proper  sense,  a  problem  at 
all,  had  not  occurred  to  us.  That  city  government 
was  a  real  government,  having  vital  need  of  a 
governmental  policy  of  its  own  to  be  determined 
without  any  reference  to  the  issues  of  national 
politics,  was  a  proposition  that  even  so  recently 
as  1880  elicited  good-natured  contempt  if  not  open 
derision. 

We  had  had  very  brief  experience  with  cities, 
our  city  governments  were  notoriously  inefficient 
and  often  very  corrupt,  and  our  prejudice  against 
the  value  to  us  of  any  foreign  political  practice, 
except  as  something  to  be  avoided,  was  so  strong 
that  the  long  and  informing  municipal  experience 
of  European  countries  in  dealing  with  the  same 
problems  was  a  sealed  book.  We  not  only  had 
no  traditions  of  correct  administration  based 
upon  sound  principles  in  any  department  of 
city  government,  but  the  spoils  virus  had  been 


38     Government  of  American  Cities 

spread  by  the  intense  partisanship  of  our  politics 
since  Jackson's  time  until  it  had  permeated  and 
demoralized  every  branch  of  the  public  service, 
local  as  well  as  national;  yet  the  efficient  and 
economical  performance  of  at  least  nine  tenths  of 
the  functions  of  city  government  was  impossible 
so  long  as  there  prevailed  the  doctrine  that  "to 
the  victors  belong  the  spoils." 

The  rapidly  increasing  needs  of  the  growing 
cities  had  demanded  continually  the  exercise  of 
new  governmental  powers,  and  the  constant 
interference  by  the  state  legislature  in  matters 
of  local  concern  was  inevitable  so  long  as  the 
city  government  was  treated  as  a  municipal  cor- 
poration in  strict  subordination  to  the  state  legis- 
lature and  possessing  no  powers  save  those  which 
the  legislative  will  conferred.'  The  demoralizing 
results  were  patent  to  all,  yet  no  escape  seemed 
possible  without  destroying  the  just  supremacy 
of  the  state  as  the  central  authority.  This  meant 
a  chaos  of  special  charters  and  special  laws  and 
the  subjection  of  the  governmental  scheme  of 
every  municipality  to  frequent  and  fundamental 
change.  It  was  almost  literally  true  that  each 
city's  government  was  but  the  expression  of 
whatever  view  seemed  to  give  advantage  for 
the  time  being  to  that  political  party  which  the 
shifting  currents  of  national  politics  had  placed 
in  temporary  control  of  the  state  legislature. 

Such  was  the  municipal  situation  in  the  United 
States  in  or  about  the  year  1880.  It  was  in 


Contrast  with  English  System      39 

marked  contrast  with  the  municipal  situation 
in  England,  where  the  Municipal  Corporations 
Act  of  1835  and  subsequent  legislation  of  the 
same  beneficent  character  had  overcome  even 
worse  evils  than  those  which  were  now  besetting 
and  demoralizing  the  cities  in  the  United  States 
and  had  produced  a  simple  and  stable  municipal 
system  under  which,  by  methods  well  suited  to 
the  political  habits  of  the  English  people,  the 
English  city  had  become  an  example  of  successful 
local  self-government  without  disturbing  or  con- 
flicting with  the  superior  authority  of  the  central 
government. 

In  England,  to  be  sure,  as  in  the  United  States, 
the  municipality  was,  in  legal  theory,  a  corpora- 
tion deriving  its  powers  from  the  central  legis- 
lature, but  the  powers  were  not  granted,  then 
taken  away.  On  the  contrary,  if  any  change  was 
made,  the  powers  already  given  were  enlarged 
or  new  powers  were  added.  The  municipality 
was,  in  practice,  treated  not  as  a  subordinate 
corporation  but  as  a  local  government,  and  the 
aim  was  to  clothe  it  with  such  governmental 
powers  as  would  enable  it  to  satisfy  the  growing 
needs  of  the  locality  governed.  Further,  it  was 
regarded  in  England  as  essential  to  a  successful 
local  government  that  it  should  be  conducted 
according  to  a  local  policy,  not  according  to  a 
national  or  imperial  policy.  The  election  of  the 
city  officers  charged  with  the  duty  of  carrying 
out  the  local  policy  was  made  a  local  election, 


40     Government  of  American  Cities 

separate  from  the  elections  in  which  the  attention 
of  the  voters  was  fixed  upon  questions  of  national 
policy  and  upon  the  choice  of  public  officers 
charged  with  the  duty  of  carrying  out  a  national 
policy.  In  the  United  States,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  municipality,  in  practice,  was  treated  as  a 
corporation  temporarily  clothed  with  only  such 
powers  as  the  central  legislature  might  grant; 
and  in  so  far  as  the  municipality  was  a  govern- 
ment, the  policy  which  controlled  its  conduct 
was  subordinated  to  the  interests  and  the  supe- 
rior claims  of  the  national  political  parties.  The 
elections  of  city  officers  were  but  a  part  of  the 
campaigns  waged  by  the  national  political  parties, 
or  of  state  campaigns  which  were  themselves 
waged  upon  national  political  issues. 

In  England,  the  fact  that  the  municipality  was 
a  corporation  deriving  its  life  and  powers  from 
Parliament  was  treated  as  affording  the  oppor- 
tunity to  grant  it  the  powers  necessary  to  perform 
the  functions  of  a  genuine  local  government ;  while, 
in  the  United  States,  the  fact  that  the  munici- 
pality was  a  corporation  was  treated  as  the 
opportunity  to  withhold,  give,  alter,  or  withdraw 
powers,  not  in  the  interest  of  the  locality,  but 
for  the  temporary  partisan  advantage  of  the 
national  political  party  which  happened  to  control 
the  legislature. 

In  England,  the  form  of  the  city  government 
was  stable  and  simple;  in  the  United  States, 
it  was  subject  to  frequent  change  and  was  most 


Contrast  with  English  System      41 

complex.  This  was  because  in  practice  a  sharp 
and  clear  distinction  was  drawn  in  England 
between  the  policy  determining  and  administra- 
tive functions  of  a  city  government,  while  no 
such  distinction  was  made  in  the  United  States. 
A  few  brief  and  easily  intelligible  provisions  in  the 
Municipal  Corporations  Act  had  sufficed,  since  its 
enactment  in  1835,  to  establish  the  political  frame- 
work of  government  for  every  English  city  except 
London.  There  had  been  no  changes  whatever  in 
the  ground  plan  and  no  changes  of  any  sort  except 
in  two  or  three  minor  details.  In  1 880,  there  were 
nearly  three  hundred  English  cities  successfully 
conducting  their  governments  under  the  plan 
which  had  been  devised  in  1835 — an<3-  the  same 
plan  is  in  successful  operation  to-day.  The 
plan  was  simplicity  itself.  The  exercise  of  all 
the  powers  of  the  municipal  corporation  is 
committed  to  a  board  varying  in  membership 
from  nine  to  seventy-two  (or  in  a  few  cases 
more)  according  to  the  population  of  the  city. 
The  municipal  electorate,  at  a  public  election 
held  exclusively  for  the  purpose,  elect  by  direct 
vote  three  fourths  of  this  board  (called  the  Coun- 
cil) and  the  elected  members  choose  the  remaining 
one  fourth.  The  former  are  called  councillors, 
the  latter  aldermen.  The  aldermen  have  a  six- 
year  term  and  are  chosen  one  half  each  third 
year.  Councillors  have  a  three-year  term,  one 
third  retiring  annually.  Usually  the  city  is 
divided  into  wards  each  of  which  elects  every 


v 

42     Government  of  American  Cities 

year  one  councillor.  A  member  of  the  Council 
may  have  his  residence  anywhere  within  fifteen 
miles  of  the  city  limits.  This  is  all  there  is  to 
the  political  structure  of  the  government  of  an 
English  city  and  Parliament  having  once  es- 
tablished it  has  left  it  alone.  No  exigency  of 
imperial  politics  has  affected  it  in  the  least. 

The  municipal  voter  in  England  is  not  only 
able  to  confine  his  attention  to  purely  local 
issues,  but  he  is  not  confused  by  being  compelled 
to  ascertain  the  records  and  qualifications  of  a 
long  list  of  candidates  for  a  large  number  of  local 
public  offices.  The  English  city  has  practically 
but  one  elective  public  officer,  the  councillor. 
All  others  are  appointees  of  the  Council.  All 
responsibility  for  the  conduct  of  the  local  govern- 
ment is  thus  concentrated  in  the  Council,  one 
third  of  whose  elected  members  come  directly 
before  the  people  each  year  to  give  an  account  of 
their  stewardship.  The  record  and  the  views  of 
each  candidate  as  to  the  local  public  policy  are 
then  submitted  to  the  voters  and  each  voter 
has  opportunity  in  the  simplest  and  most  direct 
way  to  express  and  enforce  his  approval  or 
disapproval. 

The  simple  form  of  political  structure  prescribed 
for  the  English  city  not  only  does  not  interfere 
with  but  actually  fosters  the  conduct  of  the  local 
government  according  to  local  public  opinion,  and 
Parliament  has  left  each  city  absolutely  free  to 
develop  in  its  own  way  and  according  to  its 


Contrast  with  English  System       43 

own  notions  its  administrative  organization. 
The  council  of  each  city  may  establish  any 
administrative  system  that  it  deems  wise 
and  may  alter  it  at  pleasure.  Thus,  while 
the  political  framework  of  the*  English  city 
government  is  rigid  and  substantially  the 
same  for  every  city,  the  administrative  organi- 
zation of  each  city  is  what  its  Council  has  es- 
tablished. It  is  the  City  Council,  not  Parliament 
that  decides  how  the  work  of  city  administration 
shall  be  divided,  what  departments  and  bureaus 
there  shall  be,  how  these  shall  be  manned  and 
how  officered,  and  what  compensation  shall  be 
paid  to  the  city's  civil  servants.  Each  city  has 
an  administrative  equipment  developed  by  a 
local  board  each  of  whose  members  is  directly  re- 
sponsible for  success  or  failure  to  the  municipal 
electorate  and  is  at  all  times  amenable  to  local 
criticism.  The  practical  results  have  been  that 
the  English  municipal  civil  service  has  been 
kept  free  of  both  national  and  local  politics. 
The  political  opinion  of  a  city  employ6  has  no 
influence  upon  his  tenure  of  office;  he  holds 
his  position  during  efficiency  and  good  behavior — 
unless  he  is  promoted  to  a  higher  one.  The  city 
civil  service,  especially  in  the  higher  positions 
requiring  expert  knowledge,  furnishes  attractive 
and  permanent  careers  for  men  of  marked  ability. 
In  brief,  the  English  city,  viewed  in  its  political 
aspect,  has  a  stable  and  simple  government 
which  the  municipal  voter  cannot  escape  under- 


44     Government  of  American  Cities 

standing  and  in  the  conduct  of  which  he  has  a 
direct  and  effective  influence;  while  on  its  ad- 
ministrative side  the  English  city  is  equipped 
with  a  civil  service  in  which  there  is  not  a 
member  whose  opinions  on  any  divisive  political 
issue  have  anything  to  do  with  his  tenure  of 
office. 

In  the  United  States,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
political  structure  of  each  city  government  and 
its  administrative  organization  have  been  the 
unstable  and  complicated  product  of  state  legis- 
lative activity,  very  often  partisan  in  its  charac- 
ter. The  expression  "each  city  government "  is 
used  advisedly,  for  the  so-called  "charter"  of  each 
city  has  been,  as  a  rule,  an  accumulation  pf  unre- 
lated state  statutes  enacted  from  time  to  time  with 
the  special  purpose  of  affecting  the  government  of 
that  particular  city.  The  number  of  bills  in- 
troduced at  every  legislative  session  for  this 
purpose  in  the  older  states  where  there  are  many 
cities  has  been  enormous,  and  the  quantity  of 
such  special  legislation  that  has  been  actually 
enacted  has  long  been  recognized  as  appalling.  The 
administrative  service  of  a  city  has  been  regarded 
as  an  integral  part  of  the  management  of  partisan 
politics  and  has  been  organized  and  reorganized 
with  a  view  to  partisan  advantage  by  successive 
legislatures.  The  city,  instead  of  having  a  local 
government  conducted  according  to  local  public 
opinion  has  been  treated  as  a  subject  province 
having  now  this,  now  that,  government  super- 


Contrast  with  English  System      45 

imposed  by  an  outside  sovereign.     Local   civic 
spirit  has  been  stifled. 

Let  the  reader  examine  any  of  the  city  gov- 
ernments in  the  United  States  in  1880.  He  will 
find  it  the  abject  slave  of  legislative  caprice; 
and  its  structural  framework  on  both  its  political 
and  its  administrative  side  he  must  glean  from 
state  statutes.  The  legislative  mind  has  failed 
to  recognize  any  distinction  between  the  political 
(or  policy-determining)  functions  of  a  municipal 
corporation,  considered  as  a  local  government, 
and  its  purely  administrative  functions,  which 
must  be  performed  whatever  political  policy 
is  decided  upon.  To  the  legislative  mind,  in 
the  United  States,  a  municipal  corporation  was 
primarily  and  essentially  a  political  corporation 
whose  affairs  were  to  be  conducted  in  subor- 
dination to  its  political  master — the  party  in 
control  of  the  state  legislature.  It  has  made 
elective,  without  discrimination,  purely  adminis- 
trative officers — such  as  the  law  officer  of  a  city  or 
the  members  of  a  park  board — the  efficient  per- 
formance of  whose  duties  depends  not  at  all 
upon  their  opinions  upon  any  issue  which  divides 
men  into  political  parties,  and  city  officers — 
such  as  aldermen — who  should  be  chosen  because 
of  their  opinions  on  questions  of  purely  local 
political  policy;  and  it  has  clothed  appointive 
administrative  officers — such  as  members  of  a 
health  board — with  legislative  powers.  The 
product  of  these  operations  of  the  legislative 


46     Government  of  American  Cities 

mind  has  been  a  city  government,  especially  if 
it  is  the  government  of  a  large  and  important 
city,  often  very  perplexing  to  understand.  Any 
one  who  attempted  really  to  understand  it  needed 
to  be  exceptionally  resolute,  persistent,  and 
expert  to  find  his  way  through  the  confused  and 
confusing  tangle  of  statutory  provisions  which 
held  the  city  in  their  grip.  But  any  one  of  or- 
dinary intelligence  would  have  found  it  an  easy 
matter  to  ask  and  to  answer  correctly  a  number 
of  searching  questions : 

Has  the  municipal  corporation  the  powers 
requisite  to  perform  the  governmental  functions 
which  the  best  interests  or  even  the  pressing 
needs  of  the  locality  demand  ? 

No.  The  legislature  has  granted  to  it  only  a 
part  of  these  powers. 

Does  the  municipal  corporation,  like  other 
corporations,  exercise  such  corporate  powers  as 
have  been  granted  to  it  through  a  board  of 
directors  elected  by  and  accountable  to  the 
members  of  the  corporation,  i.e.  the  city's  voters  ? 

No.  There  is  no  centering  of  responsibility, 
as  in  an  ordinary  corporation,  for  the  exercise  of 
the  corporate  powers,  and  no  way  of  enforcing 
accountability  to  the  members  of  the  corporation 
for  the  official  conduct  of  those  entrusted  with 
their  exercise.  In  practice,  the  corporate  powers 
and  the  responsibility  for  their  exercise  are 
distributed  among  a  large  number  of  officers, 
some  elective,  some  appointive,  with  overlapping 


Contrast  with  English  System      47 

terms  of  varying  length,  fixed  by  the  state  legis- 
lature. Their  salaries  are  also  fixed  and  their 
official  duties  minutely  detailed  by  the  state 
legislature.  Practically  every  one  of  these  officials, 
whether  elective  or  appointive,  is  irremovable 
during  his  term.  If  he  holds  appointive  office, 
his  appointment  was  the  result  of  a  compromise 
or  bargain  between  distinct  appointing  powers, 
neither  of  which  could  have  made  the  appoint- 
ment if  acting  alone.  Some  of  the  appointed 
officials  are  named  directly  by  the  legislature. 

How  is  responsibility  for  the  exercise  of  the 
corporate  powers  fixed? 

It  is  not  fixed  and  cannot  be  fixed  amid  the 
confusion  that  has  just  been  referred  to,  though 
not  by  any  means  adequately  described. 

How  are  the  elective  city  offices  filled? 

At  elections  when  there  are  often  elected  at 
the  same  time  such  other  public  officers  as 
members  of  congress,  members  of  both  houses 
of  the  state  legislature,  the  governor  and  all 
other  elective  state  officials,  the  sheriff,  county 
clerk,  and  other  county  officials,  members  of  the 
state  and  of  the  local  judiciary,  mayor,  aldermen, 
park  boards,  water  commissioners,  library  trus- 
tees, and  numerous  other  elective  officers  and 
perhaps  presidential  electors  as  well. 

How  is  it  possible  under  these  circumstances 
for  the  voter  to  consider  city  questions  with 
any  care  and  to  cast  his  ballot  according  to  his 
views  on  municipal  issues  ? 


48     Government  of  American  Cities 

It  is  impossible  and  it  is  not  expected  of  him. 
The  campaign  before  election  is  usually  conducted 
on  national  issues  and  the  attention  of  the  voter 
is  fully  occupied  with  national  political  questions. 
Besides,  he  knows  that  it  would  be  of  little  avail 
for  him  to  pay  attention  to  purely  municipal 
matters,  for  the  state  legislature  is  the  real 
governing  body  of  his  city. 

Have  then  the  city's  voters,  the  members  of 
the  municipal  corporation,  no  practicable  and 
effective  way  of  determining  the  policy  according 
to  which  the  corporation  shall  exercise  such 
powers  as  it  has? 

No.  The  citizen  of  the  city  must  submit  to 
whatever  local  policy  the  state  legislature,  a 
partisan  political  body  elected  by  the  general 
electorate  of  the  entire  state,  may  impose. 

But  even  if  the  city's  voters  have  no  effective 
way  of  determining  the  local  policy,  have  they 
not  through  the  popular  elections  an  effective 
method  of  enforcing  responsibility  for  the  official 
conduct  of  the  city's  public  officers? 

No.  There  are  so  many  officers  to  be  elected; 
their  official  powers  and  duties  are  so  widely 
varied;  responsibility  for  the  conduct  of  public 
affairs  is  so  divided  and  dissipated;  there  are 
so  many  checks  and  counter-checks;  and  there 
are  frequently  also,  in  addition  to  city  officers,  so 
many  county,  state,  or  national  officers  to  be 
voted  for,  that  the  citizen  is  helpless  in  the  maze. 

But  if  the  electorate  of  the  city  has  no  prac- 


Contrast  with  English  System      49 

ticable  and  effective  method  of  holding  the  city's 
public  officers  accountable,  in  what  sense  can  the 
city  be  regarded  as  a  self-governing  community? 

In  no  sense.  It  is  not  a  self-governing  com- 
munity. The  government  of  the  city  is  imposed 
upon  it  by  outside  authority  neither  responsible 
nor  responsive  to  the  electorate  of  the  city. 
The  city  is  a  subject  province  and  its  affairs  are 
conducted  according  to  the  will  of  its  sovereign, 
the  state  legislature. 

But  this  is  not  democracy? 

Of  course  it  is  not.  It  lacks  all  the  essential 
attributes  of  democracy.  The  failure  of  city 
government  in  the  United  States  is  not  a  failure 
of  democracy. 


CHAPTER  V 

INFLUENCE  UPON  CITY  GOVERNMENT  IN  THE 
UNITED  STATES  OF  THE  POLITICAL  DOCTRINES 
OF  "  CHECKS  AND  BALANCES"  AND  "PUBLIC 
OFFICES  WITH  SHORT  TERMS " 

DROPERLY  understood,  the  movement  for 
1  a  city  government  selected  by  and  account- 
able to  the  people  of  the  city  is  a  phase  of  the 
struggle  for  a  government  responsible  and  re- 
sponsive to  the  people  governed,  which  has  been 
a  chief  factor  in  the  political  development  of 
the  English-speaking  folk  ;  and  for  more  than 
a  century,  both  in  England  and  in  the  United 
States,  the  struggle  of  the  people  to  have  a 
direct  voice  and  controlling  influence  in  the 
conduct  of  public  affairs  has  been  the  strongest 
and  most  persistent  force  in  the  politics  of  both 
countries.  The  conception  of  government  as 
an  authority  imposed  upon  the  people  from 
without,  and  therefore  to  be  watched  and  guarded 
against,  has  been  more  and  more  replaced  by 
the  conception  of  government  as  an  authority 
created  by  the  people  themselves,  accountable 
to  them,  and  charged  with  the  duty  of  caring 

50 


Influence  of  Political  Doctrines      51 

for  the  common  interest.  In  England,  where 
the  barrier  of  a  written  constitution  has  not 
been  interposed,  this  democratic  ideal  has  been 
in  some  respects  more  nearly  realized  in  practice 
than  in  this  country.  This  is  especially  true 
of  the  government  of  English  cities,  where  there 
has  been  no  monarchical  tradition  to  interfere 
with  the  democratic  development. 

In  the  United  States  the  onward  movement 
of  democracy  has  been  checked  to  a  certain 
extent  and  its  course  somewhat  deflected  by 
the  rigid  barriers  of  written  constitutions.  But 
there  could  be  no  more  convincing  proof  of  the 
innate  strength  and  persistent  energy  of  the 
movement  toward  democracy  than  the  futility 
of  carefully  worked  out  provisions  placed  in  the 
federal  constitution  to  safeguard  government 
from  the  direct  influence  of  the  people. 

The  framers  of  the  constitution  took  especial 
pains  to  devise  a  scheme  of  government  that 
should  give  no  opportunity  for  the  rise  of  political 
parties  or  the  display  of  political  partisanship. 
Yet  the  people  have  been  greatly  aided  in  their 
efforts  to  have  direct  influence  in  the  conduct 
of  public  affairs  through  competition  for  popular 
support  by  the  political  parties  which  were  soon 
organized  to  bring  about  concert  of  action  between 
the  different  departments  among  which  the 
governmental  powers  had  been  distributed.  In 
each  state,  the  legal  qualifications  for  electors 
of  members  of  the  House  of  Representatives — 


52     Government  of  American  Cities 

the  only  department  of  the  central  government 
whose  members  could  be  chosen  by  direct  popular 
vote — were  to  be  those  requisite  for  electors  of 
the  more  numerous  branch  of  the  state  legislature. 
Originally  only  a  small  fraction  of  the  people 
possessed  these  qualifications,  but  the  desire 
of  the  contending  political  parties  to  increase 
the  number  of  their  voting  adherents  had  before 
the  Civil  War  enlarged  this  limited  electorate  in 
state  after  state  until  practically  every  free  white 
male  citizen  twenty-one  years  of  age  not  convicted 
of  crime  was  a  qualified  voter;  and  the  Electoral 
College  designed  by  the  constitution  to  be  a 
small  specially  selected  body  of  the  wisest  and 
most  public-spirited  men  who,  uninfluenced  by 
popular  clamor,  should  choose  the  President, 
had  become  a  merely  formal  register  of  the  votes 
cast  in  an  election  in  which  practically  the  entire 
free  male  adult  population  of  the  country  were 
besought  to  take  part.  In  more  recent  times 
the  constitutional  requirement  that  the  state 
legislatures  should  appoint  the  senators  has 
been  both  met  and  evaded  in  a  constantly  in- 
creasing number  of  states  by  converting  the 
legislatures  into  similar  formal  registers  of  the 
previously  expressed  preferences  of  the  people. 

The  personal  registration  laws  in  many  of  our 
states,  the  laws  regulating  the  casting  and  count- 
ing of  the  votes  at  elections,  the  laws  establishing 
a  secret  ballot,  the  almost  numberless  statutes 
in  recent  years  to  liberalize  the  methods  of 


Influence  of  Political  Doctrines      53 

nomination  to  public  office,  the  civil  service  reform 
laws  and  rules  already  enacted,  and  the  wide- 
spread movement  to  secure  the  passage  of  others 
in  order  to  remove  the  spoils  virus  from  the 
administrative  activities  of  government,  whether 
national,  state  or  city,  the  efforts  now  making 
to  control  the  so-called  public  service  corporations 
in  the  public  interest — and  many  other  illustra- 
tions might  be  given — have  all  had  a  common 
source  and  inspiration,  the  determination  of  the 
people  that  the  government -shall  be  the  expression 
of  their  will. 

No  one  can  understand  the  political  history 
of  the  United  States  who  does  not  recognize  as 
the  most  persistent  and  potent  factor  in  our 
political  development  this  determination  of  the 
people  to  have  a  direct  and  controlling  influence 
in  the  government;  and  their  struggle  to  make 
those  charged  with  its  conduct  responsible  and 
responsive  to  them  has  never  ceased.  Provided 
progress  towards  this  democratic  goal  was  not 
in  fact  prevented  or  unduly  impeded,  they  have 
paid  little  heed  to  provisions  in  constitution 
or  statute  or  charter  forbidding  the  progress. 
On  the  other  hand,  they  have  been  eager  for 
new  laws  and  for  amendments  to  old  laws  which 
promised  to  aid  in  their  struggle  for  responsible 
government.  If  one  would  really  understand 
the  reason  for  many  of  the  experiments  that 
have  been  tried  not  merely  in  the  field  of  govern- 
ment generally,  but  in  the  more  limited  field 


54     Government  of  American  Cities 

of  city  government,  he  must  never  forget  that 
though  the  people  have  been  often  misled,  have 
been  frequently  misinformed,  and  have  made 
many  mistakes,  they  have  never  abated  in  their 
determination  to  achieve  the  complete  triumph 
in  nation,  state,  and  city  of  the  representative 
principle — the  rule  of  the  people  through  agents 
and  agencies  chosen  by  the  people. 

Among  such  mistakes  must  be  numbered,  in 
tracing  the  history  of  our  municipal  develop- 
ment, the  application  to  city  government  of  the 
doctrines  that  governmental  power  should  be  so 
divided  and  distributed  among  those  entrusted 
with  its  exercise  that  their  several  activities 
should  serve  as  mutual  checks  and  balances, 
and  that  to  insure  due  accountability  for  official 
conduct  public  office  should  be  held  for  a  short 
term.  No  articles  of  their  political  faith  were 
more  firmly  held  by  our  forefathers. 

That  public  officers  should  be  required  at 
frequent  intervals  to  give  an  account  of  their 
stewardship  to  their  fellow-citizens  seemed  an 
ideal  way  of  preserving  and  enforcing  responsi- 
bility and  there  soon  began  a  strong  movement 
to  make  more  of  the  public  offices  elective.  There 
was  as  yet  no  conscious  appreciation  of  any 
important  distinction  between  the  functions  of 
political  and  of  purely  administrative  officers. 
Both  were  public  officers,  both  were  doing 
public  work  as  servants  of  the  people,  and  both, 
therefore,  should  be  the  direct  choice  of  the 


Influence  of  Political  Doctrines      55 

people  and  thus  be  directly  accountable  to  the 
people  for  their  official  conduct.  That  increasing 
the  number  of  elective  officers,  so  far  from  tending 
to  create  a  government  responsible  to  the  people, 
would  produce  precisely  the  opposite  effect  was 
not  contemplated.  There  was  not  even  a  thought 
of  such  a  result.  In  the  states,  governors  and 
legislators  were  already  elective;  the  members 
of  the  state  judiciary,  the  attorney-general  and 
purely  clerical  officers,  such  as  secretary  of  state, 
comptroller,  treasurer,  surveyor,  were  made  elec- 
tive as  well.  In  like  manner,  county  judges, 
county  prosecutors,  and  county  administrative 
officers  such  as  sheriffs  and  county  clerks  were 
made  elective;  and  in  cities  the  elective  offices 
became  a  legion  as  population  grew  and  the 
administrative  activities  of  a  city  government 
increased.  Elections  were  in  some  states  held  at 
the  same  time  for  all  these  offices,  state,  county 
and  city,  and  often  for  national  offices  as  well.  The 
voter,  confused  by  the  multitude  of  candidates, 
found  intelligent  exercise  of  the  franchise  impossi- 
ble. The  scheme  of  elective  offices  with  short  terms, 
which  was  to  be  an  ideal  method  of  fixing  and 
enforcing  responsibility,  proved,  on  the  contrary, 
to  be  a  perfect  device  to  make  it  impossible 
either  to  fix  or  enforce  responsibility.  No  resident 
of  any  of  our  older  cities  who  voted  at  his  last 
city  election  will  doubt  this  if  he  will  go  over 
the  list  of  offices  and  of  candidates  then  presented 
for  his  consideration  and  endeavor  to  name  the 


56     Government  of  American  Cities 

offices  with  whose  duties  and  powers  he  was 
really  familiar  and  the  candidates  of  whose 
qualifications  he  had  either  personal  knowledge 
or  a  knowledge  that  he  felt  was  the  result  of 
sufficient  inquiry  to  make  him  willing  to  put 
them  in  positions  of  trust  in  his  own  employment. 
Because  government  was  conceived  by  our 
forefathers  as  an  outside  authority  set  over  the 
people,  it  was  deemed  the  height  of  political 
wisdom  to  split  the  government  into  separate 
parts  and  to  apportion  power  among  these,  thus 
creating  a  system  of  checks  and  balances.  This 
theory  of  government  found  emphatic  expression 
in  the  federal  constitution.  Its  soundness  and 
universal  applicability  were  long  considered  polit- 
ical axioms  and  the  doctrine  was  applied  as  a 
matter  of  course  to  city  government  as  cities  began 
to  appear  in  the  United  States.  But  this  division 
of  power  necessarily  carried  with  it  a  division 
of  responsibility,  and  when  the  division  was  car- 
ried still  further  by  the  multiplication  of  short- 
term  elective  city  offices,  very  many  of  them 
purely  administrative,  it  made  impossible  a 
city  government  responsible  and  responsive  to 
the  will  of  the  citizens.  In  the  division  of  govern- 
mental power  and  the  multiplication  of  elective 
offices,  responsibility  to  the  people  for  official 
conduct  was  dissipated  and  it  became  a  physical 
impossibility  to  investigate  and  pass  upon  the 
merits  of  a  multitude  of  candidates  for  a  multitude 
of  offices.  With  such  obstacles  to  overcome  it 


Influence  of  Political  Doctrines      57 

is  no  wonder  that  the  progress  of  our  cities  to  the 
status  of  self-governing  communities  was  very 
slow  as  compared  with  the  English  cities  in 
which  neither  the  check  and  balance  system  nor 
numerous  elective  offices  hindered  the  steady 
evolution  and  intelligent  application  of  the  rep- 
resentative principle  to  municipal  government. 
Obviously  the  remedy  needed  both  in  state 
and  city  was  to  diminish  the  number  of  elective 
offices,  to  clothe  elective  public  officials  with 
greater  power,  to  make  all  purely  administrative 
offices  appointive  and  to  fill  them  in  accordance 
with  the  merit  system.  Theoretically,  this 
remedy  could  easily  be  applied  to  city  govern- 
ment, for  the  charters  of  cities  are  merely  statutes 
which  the  legislature  may  alter  at  will;  and 
there  have  been  notable  efforts  and  considerable 
progress  during  the  last  twenty-five  years  in 
the  simplification  of  city  charters,  though  the 
number  of  elective  offices  in  most  of  our  cities 
is  still  disastrously  large.  But  the  enormous 
difficulty  of  making  changes  in  written  con- 
stitutions has  in  the  case  of  national  and  state 
elective  office  compelled  resort  to  another  method 
which  has  exerted  an  influence  upon  the  character 
of  the  changes  made  in  many  city  charters  so 
powerful  that  it  deserves  examination.  Prevented 
by  the  unchangeable  terms  of  a  written  constitu- 
tion from  eliminating  the  confusion  by  diminish- 
ing the  number  of  elective  offices  among  which 
power  was  divided,  the  American  voter  was  yet 


58     Government  of  American  Cities 

by  no  means  at  the  end  of  his  resources.  The 
complete  transformation  of  presidential  electors 
into  registers  of  the  people's  will  has  already 
been  noted,  and  the  similar  transformation  of 
the  state  legislators  into  senatorial  electors  has 
been  going  on  before  our  eyes.  In  like  manner, 
without  the  alteration  of  a  syllable  in  the  national 
or  state  constitutions,  the  people  have  been 
finding  another  way  to  give  effect  to  their  desire 
for  government  responsible  to  them. 

Nothing  written  in  constitutions  could  prevent 
the  inevitable  attempt  by  every  public  officer 
to  exalt  his  own,  even  at  the  expense  of  other 
offices,  or  the  success  of  the  attempt,  if  it 
secured  general  popular  approval.  The  President 
of  the  United  States  and  the  governor  of  a  state 
are  necessarily  the  most  conspicuous  of  the 
officers  elected  by  the  people.  They  can,  if  they 
choose,  represent  more  directly  and  more  ef- 
fectively the  wishes  of  a  far  larger  constituency 
than  any  of  their  official  colleagues.  The  Presi- 
dent, when  he  speaks  to  the  Congress,  can  claim 
to  represent  the  whole  country  ;  the  governor, 
when  he  speaks  to  the  legislature,  can  claim  to 
represent  the  whole  state.  He  has  opportunity 
to  represent  the  interests  of  the  whole  people  and 
his  position  gives  him  the  strongest  inducement 
to  do  so.  He  is  one  man  and  the  Congress  or  the 
legislature  is  a  crowd;  what  he  does  and  what 
he  says  are  a  hundredfold  more  conspicuous 
than  anything  a  congressman  or  a  legislator  can 


Influence  of  Political  Doctrines      59 

do  or  say.  What  he  does  or  says  is  always  ' '  news. ' ' 
His  speeches  will  be  reported  verbatim  and  they 
are  printed  in  every  newspaper.  He  is  constantly 
stimulated  to  be  patriotic  and  public-spirited. 
He  is  not  only  the  titular  leader  of  his  party  but 
he  may,  if  he  chooses,  be  the  leader  of  the  whole 
people,  and  the  people  welcome  his  leadership 
and  have  no  fear  that  it  threatens  their  liberties. 
They  feel  that  the  courts  on  the  one  hand,  and 
their  suffrage  on  the  other,  are  sufficient  safe- 
guards against  that  danger;  that  the  power  that 
such  a  leader  exercises  is  conferred  by  their 
votes,  that  when  his  term  ends  his  power  will 
end,  unless  their  votes  continue  his  authority. 
They  have  seen  again  and  again  president  or 
governor  contending  for  the  rights  of  the  whole 
people  against  the  narrower  views  of  the  Congress 
or  the  legislature  ;  they  have  had  frequent 
opportunities  to  applaud  his  vetoes  of  selfish  or 
ill-considered  legislative  measures  and  have  come 
to  look  upon  the  chief  executive  in  the  nation 
and  the  state  as  peculiarly  representing  the 
interests  of  the  whole  people.  They  believe 
that  he  has  a  sense  of  responsibility  to  them 
such  as  no  other  elected  official  has,  and  that 
they  can  enforce  this  responsibility  more  com- 
pletely than  in  the  case  of  other  elected  officials; 
that  his  fame  rests  upon  their  approval  and  that 
their  condemnation  can  inflict  a  terrible  punish- 
ment. They  have  witnessed  the  lasting  effects 
of  their  approval  and  of  their  condemnation. 


60     Government  of  American  Cities 

Therefore,  the  exaltation  of  the  chief  executive 
has  been  one  of  the  methods  through  which 
government  responsible  to  the  people  has  been 
sought  in  nation,  in  state,  and  in  many  cities. 
The  people  are  not  afraid  of  "strong"  chief 
executives,  but  are  eager  for  them. 

Intelligent  application  of  the  representative 
principle  in  the  development  of  democratic  gov- 
ernment demands  that  power  should  be  concen- 
trated, not  dispersed.  Large  power  coupled 
with  responsibility  is  not  only  far  less  dangerous 
than  power  distributed  and  responsibility  dissi- 
pated, but  it  makes  the  government  more  truly 
representative  of  the  people  governed. 


CHAPTER  VI 

CHANGES  IN  THE  POPULAR  ATTITUDE  TOWARD 
CERTAIN  POLITICAL  DOCTRINES  AND  PRACTICES 
THAT  HAVE  MADE  BAD  CITY  GOVERNMENT 
INEVITABLE  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

JUST  as  a  thoroughgoing  cure  of  the  vicious 
municipal  conditions  prevailing  in  England 
was  made  possible  by  radical  improvement  of 
the  general  political  situation,  so,  in  the  United 
States,  a  vast  amount  of  general  political  reform 
was  a  necessary  preliminary  to  the  establishment 
of  our  city  governments  upon  a  sound  basis. 
Since  the  decade  from  1870  to  1880,  there  has 
been  a  most  wholesome  change  in  our  attitude 
toward  those  political  doctrines  and  practices  which 
made  bad  government  inevitable,  and  there  has 
been  a  notable  advance  not  alone  in  the  knowledge 
but  in  the  application  of  sound  political  principles 
which  are  pre-conditions  of  good  city  government. 
There  are  thousands  now,  where  there  were 
tens  in  1880,  who  have  learned  to  appreciate 
the  vital  distinction  between  politics  and  ad- 
ministration, and  the  importance  in  the  public 
interest  of  excluding  political  partisanship  from 

61 


62     Government  of  American  Cities 

a  government's  administrative  service;  and  who 
have  begun  to  perceive  clearly  the  harm  wrought 
by  methods  and  practices  which,  instead  of 
permitting  city  government  to  be  conducted 
according  to  a  policy  determined  by  the  local 
interests,  make  a  city's  elective  officers  the 
outcome  of  political  controversies,  foreign  to  the 
city's  interests  and  having  no  relation  to  its 
needs. 

The  growing  appreciation  since  1880  of  the  dis- 
tinction between  politics  and  administration, 
and  of  the  importance  in  the  public  interest 
of  excluding  political  partisanship  from  a 
government's  administrative  service 

The  primary  purpose  of  city  government  is  to 
meet  those  ever-growing  wants  of  the  community- 
life  which  are  created  by  the  massing  of  population 
in  a  limited  area.  This  is  true  whether  the  city 
be  situated  in  Russia,  in  Belgium,  or  in  the  United 
States.  In  the  very  nature  of  things,  in  order 
to  accomplish  this  purpose  there  must  be,  first, 
some  policy  determined  upon  and,  secondly, 
when  determined,  this  policy  must  be  effectively 
carried  out.  There  must  be  both  a  policy  and  an 
administration  of  the  policy,  or  the  primary  pur- 
pose of  city  government  cannot  be  accomplished. 
The  determination  of  policy  is  a  political  matter; 
but,  the  policy  once  determined,  the  administration 
of  the  policy  is  a  non-political,  purely  business 


Changes  in  Popular  Attitude        63 

matter.  For  example,  whether  a  city  shall  build 
water-works  directly  and  provide  its  water  supply 
is  a  political  question ;  but  the  faithful  and  compe- 
tent performance  of  the  duties  of  an  engineer  in 
the  city's  water  department  is  a  purely  adminis- 
trative matter  requiring  no  opinion  on  his  part 
as  to  the  wisdom  of  the  city's  policy  in  regard  to 
its  water  supply.  Moreover,  a  considerable,  and 
in  the  case  of  a  city  a  very  large,  proportion  of 
the  administrative  service  of  government  must 
be  carried  on  to  precisely  the  same  extent  and 
in  precisely  the  same  manner,  no  matter  what 
may  be  the  prevailing  governmental  policy. 
It  is  totally  unaffected  by  changes  in  govern- 
mental policy.  Every  official  in  the  purely  ad- 
ministrative public  service  should  therefore  be 
selected  and  retained  by  methods  which  exclude 
the  consideration  of  his  political  opinions.  In 
every  country  which  has  had  the  problem  of  city 
government  to  meet,  the  soundness  of  the  dis- 
tinction just  pointed  out  between  politics  and 
administration  has  been  demonstrated  with  abso- 
lute certainty.  In  every  one  of  them  the  success 
or  failure  of  their  city  governments  on  the  admin- 
istrative side  may  be  measured  by  the  extent  to 
which  the  personnel  of  the  city's  civil  service  has 
consisted  of  officials  retained  for  honesty,  fidelity, 
industry,  and  efficiency  and  without  reference  to 
their  partisan  political  opinions.  The  cities  of  Ger- 
many and  England  are  notable  illustrations.  The 
student  of  the  city  governments  of  these  countries 


64     Government  of  American  Cities 

finds  little  occasion  to  criticise  their  administrative 
service  on  the  score  of  the  inefficiency  of  its 
members  or  their  failure  faithfully  to  perform 
their  duties.  The  function  of  determining  public 
policy  has  in  practice  been  kept  distinct  and  apart 
from  the  function  of  actual  administration.  The 
former  has  been  recognized  as  the  proper  sphere 
of  politics,  the  latter  as  exclusively  the  sphere 
of  business.  The  importance  of  this  it  is  im- 
possible to  overemphasize.  It  is  one  of  the  chief 
reasons  for  what  has  been  again  and  again  held 
out  to  us  as  the  successful  solution  of  the  problem 
of  city  government  in  the  countries  of  Western 
Europe,  widely  as  these  may  differ  in  the  form  and 
nature  of  their  national  governments  and  in 

their  political  traditions  and  methods. 

•*• 

The  government  of  a  thinly  settled  agricultural 
country  has  very  little  occasion  for  the  exercise 
of  administrative  functions.  Nor,  even  if  the 
population  greatly  increase  in  numbers  and  wealth, 
is  there  either  much  need  or  display  of  activity 
by  the  administrative  side  of  government  so 
long  as  the  economic  conditions  of  the  people 
remain  simple.  It  was  perfectly  natural,  there- 
fore, and  almost  inevitable,  that  prior  to  the 
Civil  War  the  people  of  the  United  States  should 
pay  slight  heed  to  the  methods  of  public  ad- 
ministration; the  more  especially  since  the 
grave  and  exciting  questions  that  divided  the 
people  into  opposing  political  camps  concentrated 


Changes  in  Popular  Attitude        65 

their  attention  upon  the  political  functions  of 
government.  In  the  presence  of  these  vital 
divisive  political  issues  the  non-political,  purely 
administrative  functions  of  government  not  only 
seemed  too  insignificant  to  attract  any  notice, 
but  the  intense  partisanship  these  issues  en- 
gendered made  the  possession  or  control  of  every 
public  office  appear  a  legitimate  and  even  nec- 
essary weapon  of  political  warfare.  "  To  the 
victors  belong  the  spoils"  became  an  axiom  in 
politics. 

And  so  it  came  about  that  at  the  very  time 
when,  owing  to  changed  economic  conditions 
in  the  United  States,  the  administrative  activities 
oL  our  government,  local,  state,  and  national, 
were  constantly  increasing,  we  were  not  only 
without  any  training  in  correct  methods  of  public 
administration  but  our  standards  were  absolutely 
vicious.  The  experience  of  other  countries  had 
definitely  settled  that,  when  positions  in  the 
public  administrative  service  were  mainly  or 
largely  filled  by  personal  favorites  of  the  ap- 
pointing power,  or  as  rewards  for  partisan  politi- 
cal usefulness,  the  resultant  corruption  and  in- 
efficiency could  not  be  confined  to  the  strictly 
administrative  service;  and  that,  sooner  or 
later,  the  most  vital  questions  of  governmental 
policy  would  be  determined  not  in  the  public 
interest  but  by  the  selfish  personal  advantage 
of  those  who  controlled  the  positions  in  the 
government's  administrative  service.  The  people 


66     Government  of  American  Cities 

of  the  United  States  did  not  wilfully  disregard 
the  experience  of  other  countries;  they  simply 
knew  nothing  of  it.  Their  ignorance  did  not 
furnish  any  immunity  from  the  results  of  their 
evil  practices,  and  it  was  through  much  bitter 
experience  of  their  own  that  they  began  at  last 
to  perceive  the  harm  inevitably  wrought  by 
patronage  and  spoils  in  the  civil  service. 

A  civil  service  in  which  the  appointees  are 
selected  solely  because  of  ascertained  fitness  to 
perform  their  official  duties  and  in  which  the 
tenure  of  office  is  during  efficiency  and  good 
behavior  has  been  aptly  called  the  merit  system, 
and  this  basis  of  appointment  and  tenure  is 
aptly  called  the  merit  principle. 

When  Garfield  became  President  there  was 
already  a  considerable  body  of  intelligent  public 
opinion  insistently  urging  the  need  of  a  radical 
change  for  the  better  in  the  public  administrative 
service  and  pointing  to  many  examples  of  the 
demoralization  and  corruption  resulting  from 
a  failure  to  adopt  the  merit  system.  The  next 
few  months  furnished  examples  yet  more  flagrant. 
Scarcely  were  the  inauguration  ceremonies  ended 
before  the  senior  senator  from  New  York  pre- 
cipitated an  ignoble  quarrel  over  the  question 
whether  he  or  the  President  should  control  the 
federal  patronage  in  that  state.  The  scandal 
of  this  controversy  and  the  assassination  of  the 
President  shortly  afterwards  by  a  disappointed 
office-seeker  gave  an  impetus  to  the  movement 


Changes  in  Popular  Attitude        67 

to  better  our  civil  service  which  led  to  the  pas- 
sage by  Congress,  in  January,  1883,  °f  a  national 
civil  service  act  embodying  the  merit  principle 
and  authorizing  the  President  to  extend  the  appli- 
cation of  that  principle  to  every  appointment  in 
the  national  administrative  service  above  that  of 
day  laborer  and  not  requiring  confirmation  by  the 
Senate.  Step  by  step  under  successive  Presidents 
the  number  of  such  positions  has  been  increased, 
until  of  the  3 50,000 1  employe's  in  the  civil  service 
of  the  United  States  on  June  30,  1908,  206,6372 
were  appointed  and  held  their  employment  under 
the  merit  system — a  most  conspicuous  and  hopeful 
advance. 3  The  time  is  approaching  when  intelli- 
gent application  of  the  merit  principle  will  have 
expelled  the  debasing  and  unpatriotic  spoils 
virus  from  the  public  service  of  the  United  States. 
The  success  of  the  merit  system  in  the  federal 
civil  service  has  had  a  powerful  and  educative 
influence  throughout  the  country.  In  1883, 
New  York  passed  a  civil  service  law  based  upon 
the  federal  statute;  Massachusetts  followed  in 
1884;  Wisconsin  and  Illinois  in  1905,  Colorado 
in  1907,  and  New  Jersey  in  1908.  There  are 
strong  movements  in  other  states  to  secure  the 
passage  of  civil  service  laws.  Many  individual 

1  Approximately. 

2  This  is  exclusive  of  5,500  laborers  who  were  under  the 
rules  but  not  subject  to  examination. 

3  The    number  now   (December,    1908)   is  approximately 
222,000. 


68     Government  of  American  Cities 

cities  in  widely  separated  parts  of  the  United 
States  1  and  all  the  cities  of  New  York  and 
Massachusetts  have  placed  their  administrative 
service  at  least  partially  under  the  merit  system. 
In  New  York  the  public  approval  of  the  merit 
principle  of  appointment  and  tenure  caused  the 
insertion  in  the  state  constitution  which  went 
into  effect  in  January,  1895,  of  a  clause  requiring 
its  application  to  all  appointments  and  promotions 
in  the  civil  service  of  the  state  and  of  all  the 
civil  divisions  thereof  including  cities  and  villages. 
And  there  has  been  a  progressive  improvement 
in  the  enforcement  of  the  constitutional  mandate. 
It  is  not  our  purpose  to  give  a  history  or  even 
a  comprehensive  summary  of  the  progress  and 
accomplishment  of  the  civil  service  reform  move- 
ment in  the  United  States,2  but  enough  has 
been  already  said  to  show  how  very  much  changed 
is  our  present  attitude  toward  the  matter  of 
public  administration.  The  steady  growth  of 
an  intelligent  appreciation  of  the  profound  dis- 
tinction between  the  political  and  the  non- 
political,  the  policy-determining  and  the  purely 
administrative,  activities  of  government,  and 
of  the  importance  in  the  public  interest  of  ex- 
cluding political  partisanship  from  the  public 

1  Philadelphia,  Pittsburg,  Chicago,  Norfolk,  Va.,  Milwau- 
kee, Des  Moines  and  Cedar  Rapids,  la.,  Denver,  Seattle, 
Portland,  San  Francisco,  Los  Angeles  and  many  others. 

2  See  Carl  R.  Fish,  The  Civil  Service  and  the    Patronage 
(N.  Y.,  Longmans,  Green  and  Co.,  1905). 


Changes  in  Popular  Attitude       69 

administrative  service,  is  an  essential  factor  in 
the  work  of  improving  city  government  in  the 
United  States.  Harmful  as  is  the  intrusion  of 
politics  into  administration  in  the  case  of  other 
governments,  the  resultant  evils  are  most  con- 
spicuous in  city  government,  for  its  activities, 
of  necessity,  are  preponderantly  administrative 
and  it  can  be  neither  honest  nor  efficient  without 
an  honest  and  efficient  civil  service. 

Growth  of  the  opinion  that  city  government  should 
be  conducted  according  to  a  local  policy 
determined  by  the  needs  and  interests  of  the 
locality 

It  has  always  been  a  logical  absurdity,  upon 
its  face,  to  appeal  to  the  national  political  partisan- 
ship of  voters  in  election  contests  for  city  office, 
as  if  the  public  affairs  of  cities  should  be  or  could 
be  governed  according  to  any  national  political 
policy.  The  practical  necessity  is  plainly  apparent, 
if  government  is  to  reflect  in  its  actual  conduct 
the  views  of  the  governed,  that  questions  of 
national  policy,  national  political  issues,  should 
control  in  national  elections  and  that  questions 
of  local  policy,  local  political  issues,  should  be 
uppermost  in  local  elections.  But  prior  to  1880, 
these  considerations  neither  logically  nor  practi- 
cally had  any  weight  with  us. 

This  was  due  in  part  to  the  fact  that  it  is  only 
very  recently  that  we  have  begun  to  have  any 


yo     Government  of  American  Cities 

conception  of  city  government  as  a  real  gov- 
ernment. The  expression  city  government  has 
been  a  mere  figure  of  speech.  The  city  was 
regarded  as  the  ward  or  the  victim  of  the 
state  legislature  according  as  the  latter  was 
high  minded  and  well  intentioned,  or  was  ac- 
tuated by  less  worthy  motives;  but  that  it 
was  a  real  government,  a  genuine  political  entity 
with  the  right  to  have  a  will  and  a  policy 
of  its  own,  to  work  out  its  own  destiny,  was  a 
conception  as  yet  unformed. 

It  was  due  also  in  part  to  the  fact  that  the 
constitutional  framework  of  our  national  govern- 
ment compelled  from  the  very  beginning  party 
organization  and  partisanship  in  order  to  co- 
ordinate the  unrelated  and  disparate  governmental 
mechanism,  and  because  the  nature  of  the  political 
questions  which  occupied  the  thoughts  of  the 
people  for  many  years  prior  to  the  Civil  War, 
and  until  after  the  reconstruction  period  which 
followed  it,  gave  rise  to  an  intensity  of  national 
partisanship  that  has  no  parallel  except  in  the 
annals  of  religious  warfare. 

The  leaders  of  thought  in  this  country  at  the 
time  of  the  American  Revolution  were  convinced 
individualists  in  politics.  They  believed  that 
to  be  the  best  government  which  could  interfere 
least  with  individual  freedom  for  any  purpose 
save  to  administer  justice.  In  their  conception, 
government  was  something  distinct  and  apart 
from  the  people  governed;  it  was  an  outside 


Changes  in  Popular  Attitude        71 

and  superior  authority,  and  they  had  a  deep- 
seated  dread  lest  it  should  prove  to  be  an  op- 
pressive and  arbitrary  authority.  They  desired 
a  government  with  as  little  power  as  was  con- 
sistent with  its  being  a  government  at  all  and 
with  no  power  that  it  could  use  oppressively. 
The  Articles  of  Confederation,  under  which  a 
central  government  for  the  colonies,  now  become 
states,  was  attempted  to  be  established  after 
independence  from  Great  Britain  had  been  won, 
embodied  these  ideas.  It  was  only  the  proved 
impotence  of  these  articles  and  the  imminent 
dissolution  of  the  confederacy  into  its  original 
parts  that  finally  brought  about  the  effort  to 
establish  a  new  central  government.  There  were 
so  many  who  even  then  so  nearly  preferred  the 
dangers  of  dissolution  to  the  risks  involved  in 
submitting  to  a  central  government  with  larger 
authority,  that  it  was  well-nigh  impossible  to 
prepare  a  new  fundamental  charter  to  which 
even  so  many  as  nine  of  the  thirteen  states  would 
agree.  There  was  no  dispute  that  the  new  central 
government  should  have  no  power  that  it  could 
use  oppressively,  but  the  separatist  tendencies 
of  a  very  considerable  minority  made  them  quick 
to  suspect  possible  oppression.  Concessions  were 
constantly  necessary  and  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  which  finally  replaced  the 
weak  Articles  of  Confederation  was  a  series  of 
compromises. 
The  new  central  government  which  was  at 


72     Government  of  American  Cities 

last  agreed  upon  had  no  powers  not  enumerated 
in  the  constitution.  This  was  one  limitation 
upon  its  authority.  The  government  was  divided 
into  several  departments,  the  Judiciary,  a  Pres- 
ident, and  the  Congress,  which  in  turn  was 
subdivided  into  a  Senate  and  a  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives. The  powers  enumerated  in  the 
constitution  were  distributed  and  apportioned 
among  these,  some  to  one,  some  to  another; 
while  some,  in  order  to  be  exercised,  required 
the  joint  action  of  two  or  more  departments. 
There  were  certain  governmental  powers  which 
the  President  might  exercise  of  his  own  mo- 
tion; others  which  he  could  exercise  only  with 
the  concurrence  of  the  Senate;  and  others 
required  the  concurrence  of  the  Congress.  This 
was  another  limitation.  These  and  many  other 
provisions  in  the  constitution  testify  to  the 
careful  precautions  taken  against  the  possibility 
of  oppression  by  the  new  government.  Moreover, 
the  Supreme  Court,  when  occasion  demanded, 
passed  upon  the  question  whether  the  power 
attempted  to  be  exercised  had  in  fact  been 
granted  by  the  constitution  and  whether  the 
manner  of  its  attempted  exercise  was  in  accord- 
ance with  the  constitution. 

If  the  men  who  framed  our  constitution  dreaded 
the  oppression  of  a  strong  government,  their 
dread  was  no  less  real  of  a  government  whose 
policy  could  be  influenced  by  impulse  or  passion. 
A  government  which  was  the  direct  expression 


Changes  in  Popular  Attitude        73 

of  the  people's  will  would  have  seemed  to  them 
dangerous.  They  did  not  believe  in  the  political 
sanity  of  the  people.  A  government  of  the 
people,  by  the  people,  for  the  people  would, 
to  their  minds,  have  seemed  neither  safe  nor 
stable.  On  the  contrary,  they  desired  a  govern- 
ment so  planned  that  its  policy  would  always 
necessarily  be  the  result  of  the  mature  deliber- 
ations of  experienced  and  superior  men.  The 
limitations  already  existing  upon  the  suffrage 
made  a  qualified  electorate  which  was  but  a 
fraction  of  the  general  body  of  the  people.  This 
to  their  minds  diminished  but  did  not  remove 
the  danger  of  hasty  or  ill-considered  action. 
The  constitution,  therefore,  provided  that  this 
1imited  electorate  should  have  no  direct  voice 
in  -the  conduct  of  the  new  central  government 
beyond  electing  members  of  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives, who  were  given  a  term  of  two  years; 
tat  the  state  legislatures  should  choose  the 
inators,  whose  term  of  office  was  made  six 
and  that  the  President  should  be  chosen 
four  years  by  a  specially  selected  electoral 
ly  consisting  of  electors  from  each  state  ap- 
ited  in  such  manner  as  its  legislature  might 
rt,  the  number  from  each  state  to  be  equal 
the  number  of  senators  and  representatives 
which  the  state  was  entitled  in  the  Congress. 
These  are  some  of  the  measures  taken  by  the 
who  framed  our  constitution  to  guard  the 
)le  against  the  oppression  of  a  strong  govern- 


74     Government  of  American  Cities 

ment  and  to  guard  the  government  against  the 
unripe  thought  and  unstable  impulses  of  the 
people.  The  government  was  to  be  of  the 
whole  people  and  for  the  whole  people,  but  by  the 
best  people,  who  were  to  be  ascertained  through 
a  carefully  devised  selective  process. 

Among  other  important  aims  which  this  plan 
was  to  accomplish  was  the  abolition  of  political 
partisanship.  The  public  policy  of  the  country 
was  to  be  the  result  of  the  earnest  but  calm 
deliberations  of  the  wisest  and  best.  But  the 
disparate,  slow-moving  governmental  machinery 
with  its  mutually  interfering  parts  continually 
checking  and  blocking  one  another,  soon  proved 
in  practice  to  be  cumbrous  and  unworkable 
without  the  application  of  some  external  unifying 
force.  The  government  of  divided  powers  and 
responsibilities  established  by  the  constitution 
made  political  parties  and  political  partisanship  a 
necessary  co-ordinating  agency  to  overcome  the 
centrifugal  tendencies  of  the  constitutional  plan 
when  put  into  actual  operation,  and  to  make  possi- 
ble united  and  harmonious  action  by  the  different 
authorities  among  which  the  powers  of  the  central 
government  had  been  distributed.  From  the 
very  foundation  of  our  government,  therefore, 
national  political  parties  have  striven  to  control 
the  government  and  to  direct  its  conduct  according 
to  the  policies  they  favored. 

The  recognition  of  slavery  as  an  institution 
entitled  to  the  protection  of  the  central  govern- 


Changes  in  Popular  Attitude        75 

ment  was  one  of  the  compromises  contained  in 
the  constitution.  This  gave  rise  to  bitter  and 
prolonged  political  controversy  in  the  issue  of 
which  both  sides  felt  that  the  continuance  of 
the  Union,  the  very  life  of  the  nation,  was  at 
stake.  The  heat  of  the  controversy  was  in- 
tensified by  the  fundamental  irreconcilability  of 
the  economic  interests  of  the  contending  parties 
and  by  their  radically  opposed  social  and  ethical 
standards.  While  this  controversy  raged  there 
was  no  politics  but  national  politics  and  no 
political  partisanship  but  national  political 
partisanship. 

No  one  of  the  present  generation  can  form 
an  adequate  idea  of  the  partisan  heat  and  political 
bigotry  of  the  period  just  before,  during,  and 
for  a  considerable  time  after  the  Civil  War. 
Men  were  not  partisans  merely,  they  were  political 
zealots.  Their  political  beliefs  were  held  with 
the  tenacity  with  which  honest  religious  bigots 
cling  to  their  creeds.  The  man  who  left  his 
party  was  an  apostate,  the  man  who  did  not 
belong  to  one  of  the  recognized  political  parties 
was  an  outcast.  Even  as  late  as  the  year  1880, 
there  was  little  perceptible  abatement  in  the  heat 
of  blind  and  unreasoning  partisanship,  though 
slavery  had  been  extirpated,  the  Union  had  been 
preserved,  and  no  party  threatened  the  life  of  the 
nation. 

Gradually,  however,  even  the  embers  of  the 
old  controversy  have  been  extinguished.  The 


76     Government  of  American  Cities 

great  majority  are  still  the  confirmed  adherents 
of  one  or  other  of  the  national  political  parties; 
but  each  year  since  1880  has  increased  the  number 
of  those  who  act  now  with  one,  now  with  another 
party,  according  to  the  strength  of  the  appeal 
its  principles,  its  leaders,  and  its  behavior  make 
to  their  reason.  The  independent  voter,  the 
man  who  owns  no  fixed  allegiance  to  any  one 
party,  is  no  longer  a  pariah.  Though  he  is  still 
in  a  minority,  it  is  a  minority  that  not  infrequently 
decides  elections.  It  is  no  longer  certain  that 
the  vote  of  a  state  will  be  cast  for  the  candidates 
of  the  same  party  for  national  and  state  •  office 
even  in  the  same  election;  the  Republican  presi- 
dential electors  may  carry  a  state  by  a  large 
majority  and  yet  a  Democratic  governor  be 
elected.  It  is  no  longer  an  unheard-of  thing  that 
the  successful  candidates  for  state  offices  at  the 
same  election  belong  to  different  political  parties. 
The  blind  and  bigoted  partisanship,  the  heat 
and  passion  which  characterized  the  political 
contests  of  twenty-five  years  ago,  have  been 
largely  replaced  by  a  marked  degree  of  discrimi- 
nation among  the  voters. 

This  is  notably  the  case  in  elections  to  local 
office.  The  dominance  of  national  politics  in 
local  elections  has  sensibly  diminished.  In  many 
important  and  widely  separated  cities  there  are 
strong  organizations  proclaiming  and  endeavor- 
ing to  enforce  the  doctrine  that  questions  of 
national  politics  should  be  excluded  from  local 


Changes  in  Popular  Attitude        77 

campaigns.  In  many  of  our  states  one  may 
retain  his  position  as  a  member  in  good  and 
regular  standing  of  his  national  political  party 
though  he  is  known  to  act  independently  in 
local  politics.  In  some  states  the  national  political 
party  organizations  have  formally  announced 
that  their  members  may  have  entire  freedom 
in  voting  for  candidates  for  local  office.  It  is 
not  very  unusual  for  the  local  branch  of  a  national 
political  party  to  bid  for  popular  support  of  its 
candidates  for  city  office  upon  the  ground  that, 
if  elected,  they  will  administer  the  office  in  the 
interest  of  the  city  rather  than  of  the  national 
party.  We  have  even  of  late  years  had  local 
elections  in  which  no  national  political  question 
has  been  discussed  in  the  press  or  on  the  platform ; 
and  the  growth  and  prosperity  of  newspapers 
which  in  their  treatment  of  local  public  affairs 
are  genuinely  free  of  all  national  political  bias 
are  phenomenal.  The  constitution  of  New  York 
State  which  went  into  effect  on  January  i,  1895, 
separated  city  elections  from  national  elections 
by  a  whole  calendar  year  for  the  avowed  purpose 
of  facilitating  the  conduct  of  city  government 
independently  of  the  influences  of  national  politi- 
cal partisanship. 

The  doctrine  that  national  politics  have  no 
proper  place  in  the  determination  of  local  political 
elections  is  still  far  from  general  acceptance; 
but  one  has  only  to  remember  the  astonishment 
and  incredulity  with  which  prior  to  1880  he 


78     Government  of  American  Cities 

would  have  heard  of  such  occurrences  as  these 
that  have  been  mentioned  taking  place  anywhere 
in  the  United  States  to  appreciate  the  marvellous 
change  since  then  in  popular  sentiment.  The 
incongruity  and  absurdity  of  the  intrusion  of 
national  politics  into  the  local  field,  and  the 
positive  harm  to  the  city  of  subordinating  its 
local  interests  to  the  claims  of  national  political 
partisanship,  thereby  preventing  the  city  from 
having  or  following  a  local  policy  suited  to  its  own 
needs,  are  now  demonstrated  truths  both  logically 
and  practically.  Their  influence  is  widespread 
and  it  is  constantly  becoming  wider. 


CHAPTER  VII 

GROWTH  OP  THE  DETERMINATION  THAT   THE   CITY 
SHOULD  HAVE  A  LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  RESPON- 
SIBLE TO  THE   PEOPLE   OF  THE  CITY 

THE  people  of  the  United  States  have  been 
coming  more  and  more  to  understand  that 
the  government  of  our  cities  has  been  not  in 
conformity  with  but  in  violation  of  the  repre- 
sentative principle;  that  the  bad  government 
of  our  cities  has  been  not  so  much  by  the 
cities  themselves  as  by  outside  superimposed 
authority  not  accountable  to  and  not  chosen 
by  the  citizens  of  the  city;  that  a  city  subject 
to  constant  ravages  by  the  state  legislature 
can  have  no  local  policy  of  its  own;  that  a  city 
government  without  power  to  satisfy  the  needs 
or  protect  the  interests  of  the  city  lacks  both 
the  dignity  and  the  authority  to  command  the 
respect  of  its  citizens  or  arouse  the  feeling  of 
local  patriotism.  We  have  been  learning  the 
lesson  that,  if  the  cities  are  to  be  well 
governed,  they  must  be  self-governing.  Like 
progress  at  the  same  rate  for  another  twenty- 
five  years  should  make  our  cities  really  self- 

79 


8o     Government  of  American  Cities 

governing  communities,  free   to  work  out  their 
own  destinies. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  last  quarter  of  the 
nineteenth  century  practically  every  city  govern- 
ment in  the  United  States  could  be  generally 
described  as  follows: 

It  was  a  corporation  created  by  statute  and 
possessed  only  such  governmental  powers  as  the 
state  legislature  granted  from  time  to  time  and 
permitted  it  to  retain  and  such  administrative 
system  as  the  state  legislature  for  the  time  being 
prescribed ; 

In  its  general  form,  a  city  government 
copied  that  of  the  national  government.  There 
was  always  a  locally  elected  mayor  and  a 
legislative  body,  the  latter  consisting  of  one 
and  frequently  two  chambers;  and  there  were 
various  administrative  departments,  police,  fire, 
water,  etc.,  whose  heads,  sometimes  individ- 
uals and  sometimes  boards,  held  office  for 
fixed  terms  and,  when  not  appointed  by  the 
state,  were  elected  by  popular  vote  or  chosen 
by  the  local  legislative  body  or  one  of  its 
chambers,  sometimes  upon  previous  nomination 
by  the  mayor; 

No  city  had  all  the  powers  of  government 
requisite  to  satisfy  its  local  needs — many  had 
very  restricted  power — but  there  was  almost  no 
governmental  power  which  some  city  did  not 
possess  and  exercise; 

Elections  to  city,  as  well  as  to  county,  state, 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    81 

and  national  office  were  treated  as  integral  parts 
of  national  political  campaigns. 

There  are  multiplying  evidences  that  the  popu- 
lar conception  of  city  government  has  been 
undergoing  a  great  and  radical  change.  As  al- 
ready pointed  out  there  has  been  since  the  decade 
between  1870  and  1880  a  clearer  and  clearer 
appreciation  by  our  people  of  the  wisdom  of 
keeping  politics  and  administration  apart  in  the 
conduct  of  government,  and  a  constantly  increas- 
ing perception  of  the  grave  damage  to  the  public 
interests  of  the  cities,  and  of  the  nation  as  well, 
by  illogically  involving  questions  of  purely  local 
concern  in  the  strife  of  national  political  parties. 
There  have  also  been  notable  efforts  on  the  part 
of  many  of  our  cities  to  free  themselves  from 
legislative  domination,  to  obtain  grants  of 
power  adequate  to  care  for  all  matters  of 
purely  local  concern,  to  secure  and  enforce 
accountability  to  the  city's  voters  for  the  ex- 
ercise of  the  powers  granted,  and,  to  that  end, 
to  simplify  the  form  of  city  government.  A 
statement,  even  if  it  be  only  a  summary  one, 
of  what  has  been  and  is  being  done  by  some  of 
our  cities  to  accomplish  these  results  cannot 
fail  to  be  instructive.  The  lines  of  effort  and 
the  degrees  of  success  attained  have  varied  in 
the  different  states,  sometimes  widely,  as  was 
to  have  been  expected  with  a  people  so  re- 
sourceful and  inventive  as  ours,  but  this 


82     Government  of  American  Cities 

very  variety  brings    out    clearly  the  oneness  of 
purpose. 

The  concentration  of  power  in  the  mayor. 

The  attitude  of  the  American  people  toward 
the  executive  branch  of  the  government  is  in 
interesting  and  significant  contrast  to  the  dread 
of  the  executive  which  was  so  influential  in 
determining  the  form  of  government  the  framers 
of  our  national  constitution  devised.  After  a 
century's  experience  of  the  actual  operation  of 
the  constitutional  checks  and  balances,  the  abuse 
of  power  that  the  people  fear  is  by  the  leg- 
islative, not  by  the  executive  branch  of  the 
government;  the  executive  has  risen  and  the 
legislative  sunk  in  the  confidence  of  the  people. 
Of  the  many  illustrations  of  this,  the  increasing 
number  of  restrictions  upon  and  regulations  of 
legislative  activity  placed  in  our  state  constitu- 
tions, as  from  time  to  time  new  states  are  ad- 
mitted to  the  Union  or  the  older  states  adopt 
new  constitutions,  is  significant.  So  has  been 
the  successive  deprivation  of  the  aldermen,  or 
other  local  legislative  body  in  the  cities,  of  legis- 
lative power. 

When,  therefore,  persistent  bad  government  in 
the  cities  of  the  United  States  began  to  compel 
effective  attention  and  we  began  to  perceive 
that  a  city  government  irresponsible  to  the 
people  of  the  city  was  one  of  the  main  causes 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    83 

of  the  low  estate  into  which  municipal  adminis- 
tration had  sunk,  one  of  the  lines  of  remedial 
effort  which  previous  political  experience  com- 
mended was  the  enlargement  of  the  power  of 
the  mayor,  the  city's  chief  executive.  The 
structural  plan  of  the  government  found  in  the 
usual  city  charter  prior  to  1880  was  an  exagger- 
ated reproduction  of  the  government  of  divided 
powers  and  responsibility  in  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  but  there  was  a  far  more 
minute  division  of  power.  Such  governmental 
powers  as  the  city  possessed  were  divided  among 
various  elected  officials  many  of  whom  performed 
purely  administrative  duties.  The  mayor  was 
a  mere  simulacrum  of  a  chief  executive  and  the 
powers  that  he  could  exercise  of  his  own  motion 
were  usually  of  slight  importance.  The  appointive 
heads,  whether  individuals  or  boards,  of  the  city 
departments,  were  such  persons  as  the  mayor 
and  the  local  legislative  body  or,  in  some  cases, 
the  local  legislative  body  acting  alone,  could 
agree  upon.  These  held  office  for  fixed  terms, 
often  for  a  period  beyond  the  mayor's  own 
tenure,  and  could  be  removed  by  him  only  upon 
formal  charges  and  after  a  trial  in  which  the 
officer  was  regarded  as  an  accused  person  entitled 
to  counsel  and  often  having  the  right  of  appeal  to 
the  governor  or  to  the  courts  and  sometimes 
to  both.  Here  were  checks  and  balances  enough, 
and  pretty  nearly  complete  irresponsibility  on  the 
part  of  both  the  elected  and  the  appointed  officials. 


84     Government  of  American  Cities 

It  was  argued  that  the  mayor  should  be  the 
chief  executive  of  the  city  in  fact  as  well  as  by 
title,  that  heads  of  the  city  departments  should 
be  appointed  by  the  mayor  and  should  be  re- 
movable at  his  pleasure.  So  long  as  the  spoils 
doctrine  prevailed  in  the  appointments  to  its 
civil  service  it  was  recognized  that  the  conduct 
of  the  city's  public  affairs  would  still  be  wasteful 
and  inefficient;  but  it  was  urged  that,  if  the 
citizens  could  hold  the  mayor  accountable  for 
the  kind  and  quality  of  the  service  rendered, 
this  would  be  a  long  step  toward  securing  a 
city  government  responsible  to  the  people. 

This  argument  secured  a  strong  popular  sup- 
port in  the  city  of  Brooklyn  (New  York)  and 
the  state  legislature  permitted  that  city  in  a 
small  and  tentative  way  to  test  its  merits  by  a 
practical  application.  The  mayor  of  Brooklyn 
by  an  amendment  to  its  charter  was  given  power 
during  thirty  days  after  he  took  office  to  remove 
and  appoint  at  pleasure  non-elective  heads  of 
city  departments.  The  first  election  under  the 
amended  charter  took  place  in  November,  1881, 
and  aroused  a  general  interest  among  the  voters 
never  witnessed  in  any  previous  election.  The 
city  was  strongly  Democratic  on  national  issues, 
but  was  carried  for  the  mayoralty  candidate  of 
the  Republicans  and  Independents.  He  entered 
upon  the  duties  of  his  office  on  January  i,  1882, 
and  promptly  appointed  heads  of  each  city 
department.  The  results  of  the  experiment  were 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    85 

so  successful  that  the  "  Brooklyn  Idea,"  as  it 
was  called,  has  markedly  influenced  charter 
changes  in  many  other  cities  of  the  state, 1  and, 
supported  and  pressed  by  powerful  public  senti- 
ment, has  revolutionized  the  position  and  powers 
of  the  mayor  in  Brooklyn  and  its  adjacent  city 
of  New  York  and  in  the  greater  city  of  New 
York  of  which  they  now  are  a  part.  The  division 
and  dissipation  of  responsibility  among  the 
members  of  a  board  has  been  replaced  by  making 
a  single  head  accountable  for  the  efficiency  of 
a  city  department.  This  change  also  has  worked 
well.  New  York  City,  for  example,  formerly 
had  a  board  of  police  commissioners,  a  board 
of  dock  commissioners,  and  so  on;  it  now  has 
a  police  commissioner  and  a  dock  commissioner. 
Moreover,  the  tenure  of  office  of  the  head  of  a 
city  department  is  no  longer  a  fixed  term.  He 
may  retain  his  position  under  successive  mayors 
without  reappointment,  but  the  mayor  can  re- 
move him  at  pleasure. 
Thus,  in  the  local  government  of  the  territory 

»  "  The  mayors  of  the  six  largest  cities  in  New  York  State, 
of  Boston,  of  all  cities  in  Indiana,  and  a  few  other  cities, 
have  now  the  sole  and  absolute  power  of  appointing  the 
heads  of  most  of  the  municipal  departments;  and  in  the 
same  cities,  with  the  addition  of  the  four  largest  cities  in 
Pennsylvania,  mayors  have  the  power  of  removing  at  any 
time  the  appointed  heads  of  departments.  Under  this 
system  the  executive  authority  and  responsibility  is  con- 
centrated in  the  mayor,  except  for  a  few  officials  still  elected 
by  popular  vote." — Fair  lie,  Essays  in  Municipal  Adminis- 
tration (New  York,  1908),  p.  22. 


86     Government  of  American  Cities 

now  comprised  in  the  city  of  New  York,  a  rev- 
olution has  taken  place  since  January  i,  1882. 
The  heads  of  each  city  department  are  account- 
able to  the  mayor,  who  is  responsible  for  their 
efficiency  to  the  people  who  elect  him  as  the 
executive  head  of  all  the  departments.  If  the 
other  provisions  of  the  charter  were  as  simple 
and  direct,  the  greater  city  of  New  York  would 
have  an  opportunity  to  furnish  an  admirable 
example  of  a  completely  self-governing  com- 
munity. As  it  is,  stimulated  by  the  changes 
already  noted  and  aided  by  the  gradual  spread 
of  the  merit  system  in  the  subordinate  city 
civil  service,  its  government  has  grown  better 
and  better  and  there  has  been  developed  a  stronger 
and  more  widespread  local  patriotism  than  was 
even  thought  possible  twenty-five  years  ago. 
There  has  been  an  ever  more  insistent  demand 
for  more  power  in  order  to  conduct  its  local 
affairs  without  applying  to  the  legislature,  and 
a  constantly  growing  resentment  at  legislative 
interference  with  the  exercise  of  local  powers 
already  granted.  In  this  feeling  the  other  cities 
of  the  state  strongly  shared,  and  in  the  state 
constitution  which  went  into  effect  January  i, 
1895,  there  was  incorporated  a  provision  some- 
times called  the  "Mayor's  Veto."  The  cities  of 
the  state  are  divided  into  three  classes  and  every 
bill  relating  to  a  single  city,  or  to  less  than  all 
the  cities  of  a  class,  must,  after  passing  the 
legislature,  be  sent  to  the  mayor  of  the  city 


Local  Self-Go vernment  the  Goal    87 

affected.  After  public  notice  and  opportunity 
for  a  hearing,  if  the  mayor  of  a  first-class  city 
(or  the  mayor  and  local  legislative  body  of  a 
city  of  the  other  classes)  does  not  accept  the 
bill  within  fifteen  days,  it  must  be  repassed  by 
the  legislature  before  transmission  to  the  governor 
for  his  action. 

Safeguarding  the  city  from  the  state  legislature  by 
constitutional  provisions. 

The  meddling  by  the  state  legislature  with 
the  local  affairs  of  cities  to  their  great  damage 
has  led  to  the  adoption  in  many  of  our  states 
of  constitutional  provisions  which  endeavor  to 
correct  the  evil. *  Their  terms  have  varied  in 
the  different  constitutions,  but  each  has  sought 
to  prevent  or  regulate  special  legislation  in 
reference  to  cities.  This  was  one  of  the  earliest 
means  tried  to  better  city  government.  For 
various  reasons,  this  method  has  not  proved  as 
efficacious  in  practice  as  had  been  hoped,  but 
the  lessons  which  is  has  taught  have  been  of 
great  value.  In  one  state,  Illinois,  the  constitu- 
tional prohibition  against  special  legislation  has 
been  so  interpreted  by  the  courts  as  to  be  a  far 
more  successful  defence  against  ingenious  at- 
tempts to  evade  it  than  has  usually  been  the  case. 

1  A  statement  showing  those  restrictions  in  tabulated  form 
(Constitutional  Limitations  Relating  to  Cities  and  Their 
Affairs)  may  be  found  in  the  Annals  of  the  American  Academy 
(January,  1906),  p.  232. 


88     Government  of  American  Cities 

This  has  led  to  a  very  interesting  and  highly 
instructive  illustration  of  the  persistent  efforts 
the  people  of  a  city  are  willing  to  make  to  control 
its  government  if  no  outside  authority  can 
interfere.  It  has  also  furnished  concrete  and 
convincing  evidence  to  all  men  that  in  the  United 
States,  if  no  outside  authority  can  help  or  hinder, 
the  citizens  of  a  city  will  find  a  way  to  control 
its  government. 

When  the  citizens  of  Chicago  began  to  be 
aroused  to  some  consciousness  of  the  low  char- 
acter of  its  government  and  sought  a  remedy, 
they  pursued  a  course  in  striking  contrast  to 
that  taken  in  other  cities  and  undertook  the 
reformation  of  the  city's  Council.  This  appar- 
ently hopeless  task  was  successfully  accomplished 
and  Chicago's  local  legislature  became  worthy 
of  the  confidence  of  its  citizens. 

That  Chicago  in  a  few  years  should  have  so 
far  changed  the  character  of  its  Council  that 
it  became  a  body  in  whose  honesty  and  com- 
petence the  people  of  the  city  could  confide  is 
certainly  a  splendid  achievement.  But  the 
real  significance  of  what  Chicago  did,  the  lasting 
and  permanent  contribution  it  made  to  the 
betterment  of  municipal  government  in  the 
United  States,  is  in  the  circumstances  and  con- 
ditions under  which  this  result  was  accomplished. 

Chicago's  government  was  bad,  but  it  was 
not  more  desperately  bad  than  the  government 
of  Philadelphia  or  New  York  City,  for  example. 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    89 

Yet  neither  Philadelphia  nor  New  York  has 
made  any  improvement  in  its  government  through 
elevating  the  character  of  the  local  legislature. 
Little,  if  any,  thought  and  no  effort  worth  men- 
tioning have  been  bestowed,  in  either  of  those 
cities,  upon  this  method  of  bettering  the  conduct 
of  local  affairs.  In  New  York,  for  instance,  the 
Board  of  Aldermen,  thoroughly  discredited  by 
the  improvident  and  unworthy  use  of  the  powers 
entrusted  to  it,  has  been  gradually  stripped  of 
most  of  the  authority  it  formerly  had  and  the 
thought  and  efforts  of  those  who  sought  to 
obtain  a  city  government  responsible  and  account- 
able to  the  people  of  the  city  have  been  directed 
toward  the  enlargement  of  the  power  of  the 
mayor.  But  the  New  York  aldermen  were  no 
more  thoroughly  discredited  and  no  more  un- 
worthy of  trust  than  the  councilmen  of  Chicago. 
Why  then  did  Chicago,  when  it  began  to  feel 
the  stirrings  of  a  civic  conscience,  undertake 
the  immensely  laborious  and  apparently  hopeless 
task  of  making  over  its  Council  and  persist  until 
it  accomplished  what  had  been  considered  wholly 
impossible?  It  was  because  there  was  no  other  way. 
In  Illinois,  recourse  to  the  legislature  for  aid, 
and  meddling  by  the  legislature,  were  alike  shut 
off  by  the  state  constitution.  The  legislature 
could  not  deprive  Chicago's  councilmen  of  their 
power  and  the  people  of  Chicago  could  not  suc- 
cessfully appeal  to  the  legislature  for  any  change 
in  the  structural  plan  of  the  city  government. 


90     Government  of  American  Cities 

However  ill-fitted  might  be  the  charter  of  Chicago 
to  the  needs  of  the  city,  no  change  in  it  could  be 
made  through  the  aid  of  the  legislature.  Pro- 
tected from  legislative  interference  and  cut  off 
from  legislative  aid  and  subject  to  the  restrictions 
of  an  unamendable  city  charter,  the  people  of 
Chicago  were  obliged  either  to  continue  to  submit 
to  bad  city  government  or  to  transform  the  per- 
sonnel of  its  Council.  There  was  no  alternative. 
In  New  York,  on  the  other  hand,  the  legislature 
of  its  own  motion  and  at  the  suggestions  of 
residents  of  the  city  was  habitually  modifying, 
revising,  or  repealing  this  or  that  provision  of 
the  huge  congeries  of  statutes  under  which  the 
city  government  was  conducted.  Nothing  was 
final.  The  city  government  at  any  given  time 
was  simply  one  of  a  series  of  legislative  experi- 
ments. The  legislature  was  always  meddling 
and  some  one  claiming  to  represent  local  inter- 
ests was  always  appealing  to  the  legislature.  The 
number  of  bills  affecting  the  city  government 
introduced  at  each  session  of  the  legislature 
mounted  into  the  hundreds,  and  scores  of  them 
were  enacted  into  law  at  every  session.  Under 
these  conditions  it  is  not  surprising  that  the 
bettering  of  city  government  in  New  York  through 
the  elevation  of  the  character  of  its  aldermen 
was  not  seriously  attempted  nor  even  seriously 
considered.  This  contrast  in  basic  conditions 
between  New  York  and  Chicago  explains  why 
the  two  cities  proceeded  along  such  different 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    91 

lines  in  their  efforts  to  secure  a  local  government 
really  responsible  to  the  people  of  the  locality — 
the  one  by  concentrating  power  in  the  mayor, 
the  other  by  improving  the  personnel  of  its 
City  Council. 

That  Chicago  should  alone  among  our  cities 
have  succeeded  in  transmuting  its  Council 
from  a  public  menace  into  a  competent  and 
really  representative  local  legislature,  which  can 
be  safely  entrusted  with  large  authority,  is  most 
significant.  To  students  of  the  city  problem 
in  the  United  States,  the  most  instructive  lesson, 
the  supreme  significance  of  Chicago's  experience, 
is  this:  Alone  of  all  our  great  cities,  Chicago's 
form  of  government  was  unamendable;  the  state 
legislature  was  obliged  to  leave  Chicago's  local  gov- 
ernment alone. 

Home-made  city  charters. 

The  people  of  each  state,  when  it  comes  into 
the  Union,  and  from  time  to  time  thereafter, 
elect  delegates  to  a  convention  which  frames  a 
fundamental  charter  for  the  state  government. 
When  ratified  by  the  people  at  a  general  election — 
occasionally  without  such  ratification — this  be- 
comes the  organic  law  and  is  controlling  upon 
every  citizen  and  every  department  and  official 
of  the  state  government  until  it  is  amended  in 
like  manner  by  the  people.  Why  should  not  the 
people  of  a  city  as  well  as  the  people  of  a  state 
have  a  charter  of  their  own  making  and  thus  be 


92     Government  of  American  Cities 

able  to  have  a  government  adapted  to  their  local 
needs,  changing  it  from  time  to  time  as  occasion 
requires?  Why  should  any  outside  authority 
impose  a  government  upon  the  city  ?  Why  should 
the  city  not  evolve  one  for  itself?  These  per- 
fectly natural  questions  have  been  answered 
in  the  affirmative  by  the  people  in  several 
states. 

In  1875  the  state  of  Missouri  had  a  constitutional 
convention.  The  delegates  from  St.  Louis  were 
instructed  by  their  constituents  to  secure  the 
insertion  in  the  new  state  constitution  of  provisions 
which  would  give  St.  Louis  the  right  to  make 
its  own  charter  and  would  protect  the  city 
from  interference  by  the  state  legislature  in 
the  city's  local  affairs.  The  attempt  was  measur- 
ably successful.  The  new  state  constitution 
which  was  ratified  by  the  people  at  the  autumn 
election  in  1875  provided  that  "any  city  having 
a  population  of  more  than  100,000  *  inhabitants 
may  frame  a  charter  for  its  own  government, 
consistent  with  and  subject  to  the  constitution 
and  laws  of  this  state."  A  board  of  thirteen 
freeholders  elected  by  the  people  of  the  city  was 
to  draft  the  charter,  which,  if  subsequently 
ratified  at  the  polls,  should  "supersede  any 
existing  charter  and  amendments  thereof."  The 
state  constitution  required  that  the  charter 

«  St.  Louis  was  separately  provided  for,  but  on  essentially 
the  same  plan.  St.  Louis  was  the  only  city  in  Missouri  at 
the  time  having  more  than  100,000  inhabitants. 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    93 

should  provide  for  a  mayor  and  a  two-chamber 
council,  of  which  at  least  one  branch  should  be 
elected  on  a  general  ticket ;  prescribed  the  qualifi- 
cations of  the  "freeholders"  and  the  manner  of 
their  election;  set  forth  how  the  draft  of  the 
charter  should  be  submitted  to  the  people  of 
the  city  and  how  amendments  to  it  might  be 
made  from  time  to  time;  and  contained  other 
important  details  of  procedure  as  well  as  a  number 
of  limitations  and  restrictions,  the  result  of  all 
of  which  was  that  the  city  had  by  no  means  the 
absolute  freedom  that  one  might  suppose  from 
the  general  language  quoted.  But  the  contrast 
with  its  previous  thraldom  to  the  state  legislature 
was  great. 

St.  Louis  promptly  enacted  a  freeholders' 
charter,  and  its  new  government  proved  to  be 
so  superior  to  any  the  state  legislature  had  pre- 
viously permitted,  that  California  adopted  the 
same  general  plan  for  its  cities  having  a  population 
of  more  than  100,000  (that  is,  for  San  Francisco), 
but  required  that  the  charter,  after  its  passage 
by  the  people  of  the  city,  should  be  submitted 
to  the  legislature  for  approval. l  These  provisions 
of  the  California  constitution  went  into  effect 
January  i,  1880.  The  submission  to  the  legis- 
lature proved  in  practice  to  be  a  merely  formal 
matter;  and  in  1887  the  right  to  frame  their 
own  charters  was  extended  to  all  cities  having 

i  The  legislature  could  approve  or  disapprove,  but  could 
not  amend  the  proposed  charter. 


94     Government  of  American  Cities 

more  than  10,000  inhabitants,  and  in   1890  to 
those  having  more  than  3,500.         +& 

The  California  constitution  of  1880  made  such 
a  charter  supersede  all  "special  laws"  incon- 
sistent therewith.  This  made  trouble,  and  in 
1892  another  constitutional  amendment  struck 
out  the  word  "special."  There  was  still  trouble, 
for  the  home-made  charter  provisions  had  to 
be  construed  in  connection  with  other  consti- 
tutional provisions,  and  in  1896  still  another 
constitutional  amendment  was  adopted,  which 
provided  in  terms  that  such  charters  "except  in 
municipal  affairs  should  be  subject  to,  and 
controlled  by,  general  laws."  This  placed  the 
supremacy  of  the  city  in  purely  local  matters 
beyond  question.  This  sketch  of  California 
experience  gives  conclusive  proof  of  the  strong 
desire  of  the  people  to  have  a  government  of 
their  own  making. 

In  1889,  the  state  of  Washington  followed 
the  example  of  Missouri  and  California  and 
adopted  a  constitutional  provision  giving  to 
every  city  having  20,000  inhabitants  considerable 
authority  to  frame  its  own  charter.  Minnesota 
followed  in  1896,  granting  such  authority  under 
certain  constitutional  restrictions  to  every  city 
without  regard  to  its  population;  and  in  1902, 
similar  provisions  applicable  to  all  cities  of  the 
first  and  second  classes  *  were  incorporated  in 

»  In  1908  this  included  all  cities  having  a  population  of 
2,000  or  more. 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    95 

the  constitution  of  Colorado.  In  1906,  Oregon 
incorporated  a  home-made  charter  provision  in 
its  constitution.  Oklahoma  entered  the  Union 
with  such  a  provision  in  its  constitution  in  1907, 
and  Michigan's  new  constitution1  (adopted  No- 
vember, 1908)  provides  a  method  by  which  the 
cities  of  that  state  may  have  very  considerable 
freedom  in  the  framing  and  amendment  of  their 
charters. 

The  constitutions  of  Missouri,  California,  Wash- 
ington, Minnesota,  Colorado,  Oregon,  Oklahoma, 
and  Michigan  show  many  differences,  some  of 
them  important,  in  their  respective  provisions 

»  "The  legislature  shall  provide  by  a  general  law  for  the  in- 
corporation of  cities,  and  by  a  general  law  for  the  incorpora- 
tion of  villages.  .  .  .  Under  such  general  laws,  the  electors 
of  each  city  and  village  shall  have  power  and  authority  to 
frame,  adopt,  and  amend  its  charter,  and,  through  its  reg- 
ularly constituted  authority,  to  pass  all  laws  and  ordinances 
relating  to  its  municipal  concerns,  subject  to  the  constitution 
and  general  laws  of  the  state."  Art.  VIII,  §§  20,  21. 

"Any  city  or  village  may  acquire,  own,  establish,  and 
maintain,  either  within  or  without  its  corporate  limits, 
parks,  boulevards,  cemeteries,  hospitals,  almshouses,  and 
all  works  which  involve  the  public  health  or  safety."  Art. 
VIII,  §  22. 

On  the  affirmative  vote  of  three  fifths  of  the  electors  of  a 
city  or  village  voting  thereon  at  a  regular  or  special  municipal 
election — and  upon  such  proposition  women  taxpayers  having 
the  qualifications  of  male  electors  shall  be  entitled  to  vote 
— any  city  or  village  may  acquire,  own,  and  operate,  either 
within  or  without  its  corporate  limits,  public  utilities  for 
supplying  water,  light,  heat,  power,  and  transportation  to 
the  municipality  and  the  inhabitants  thereof ;  and  may 
also  sell  and  deliver  water,  heat,  power,  and  light  without 
its  corporate  limits  to  an  amount  not  to  exceed  twenty-five 


96     Government  of  American  Cities 

for  city-made  charters.  In  none  of  the  states 
mentioned  are  the  cities  entirely  free  to  have  a 
government  of  their  own  devising,1  but  in  spite 
of  many  hampering  restrictions  these  home-made 
charters  have  been  invariably  superior  to  the 
state  legislative  products  they  displaced,  and  it 
is  generally  the  case  also  that  each  successive 
home-made  charter  is  an  improvement  on  the 
one  that  preceded  it.  The  movement  for  home- 
made charters  points  very  clearly  to  one  way  of 
achieving  a  city  government  responsible  and 
responsive  to  the  people  of  the  city.  This  does 
not  necessarily  mean  that  a  city  clothed  with 
complete  power  for  self-government  would  im- 
mediately be  a  well-governed  city.  The  people 
must  first  govern  themselves  before  they  govern 
themselves  well.  They  certainly  cannot  remedy 
bad  government  unless  they  have  a  direct  and 
controlling  voice  in  the  conduct  of  government. 
The  spread  of  the  "Missouri  Idea'*  is  a  noteworthy 

per  cent,  of  that  furnished  by  it  within  the  corporate  limits; 
and  may  operate  transportation  lines  without  the  munici- 
pality within  such  limits  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law: 
Provided,  that  the  right  to  own  or  operate  transportation 
facilities  shall  not  extend  to  any  city  or  village  of  less  than 
twenty-five  thousand  inhabitants.  Art.  VIII,  §§  25,  23. 

»  The  number  of  cities  is  constantly  growing  which  prefer 
these  "home-made"  charters.  To  mention  some  of  them: 
In  Missouri,  St.  Louis  and  Kansas  City  have  framed  their 
own  charters  so  far  as  they  have  been  free  to  do  so;  some 
twenty  of  the  cities  of  California,  including  San  Francisco, 
Sacramento,  and  Los  Angeles;  at  out  a  score  of  the  cities 
of  Minnesota;  Seattle,  Spokane,  and  Everett  in  the  state  of 
Washington;  Denver,  Colorado. 


Local  Self-Go vernment  the  Goal    9? 

indication  of  the  growing  recognition  of  the  right 
of  cities  to  have  control  of  their  local  affairs  with- 
out interference  by  the  state  legislature  and  to 
that  end  to  frame  their  local  governments  them- 
selves. 

City  government  by  a  board  of  directors. 

Texas  and  certain  other  of  the  states  that 
have  followed  its  example  have  been  recently 
attempting  to  reach  the  goal  of  responsible  local 
government  by  an  adaptation  of  the  English 
plan  of  a  locally  elected  council  which  shall 
exercise  such  powers  as  the  city  has  under  its 
charter  after  essentially  the  same  fashion  as  a 
board  of  directors1  exercises  the  charter  powers 
of  a  corporation. 

1  Because  the  members  of  the  Galveston  board  were 
called  commissioners  the  title  "  City  Government  by  Com- 
mission" was  early  given  to  this  method  of  city  government. 
To  Eastern  ears,  familiar  with  state-appointed  commissions 
and  commissioners  to  perform  purely  local  functions,  this 
expression  is  most  misleading.  It  sometimes  leads  to  the  im- 
pression that,  in  so  far  as  this  "  Government  by  Commission  " 
is  successful,  it  goes  to  prove  that  city  government  is  busi- 
ness, not  government,  and  therefore  best  conducted  by  a  few 
business  men  on  strictly  business  principles  as  an  entirely 
subordinated  agency  of  the  state.  On  the  contrary,  city 
government  according  to  the  "Galveston  Idea"  is  at  the 
very  opposite  political  pole.  The  elected  officials  it  calls 
commissioners  are  closely  analogous  to  the  selectmen  of 
the  New  England  towns,  and  like  them  are  responsible  to 
the  local  electorate.  The  "  Commission  "  system  may  also 
be  compared  to  the  commissioner  type  of  county  government 
which  prevails  in  many  states. 
7 


98     Government  of  American  Cities 

In  1900,  Galveston,  Texas,  had  the  usual 
type  of  city  government  in  the  United  States, 
the  usual  type  both  as  to  general  form  of  govern- 
ment and  as  to  quality  of  administration.  The 
private  business  of  its  citizens  was  prosperous, 
but  the  city  itself  was  without  financial  strength; 
its  sanitary  condition  was  poor,  its  streets  were 
in  bad  condition,  and  the  police  did  not  enforce 
the  laws.  A  great  hurricane  swept  the  city  and 
left  it  prostrate.  The  city  is  situated  on  low 
ground  and  its  defences  from  the  Gulf  were 
destroyed.  The  private  business  of  its  people 
was  no  longer  prosperous  ;  its  bonds  fell  to 
sixty  and  the  bankruptcy  of  the  city  and  its 
citizens  was  impending.  The  emergency  was 
beyond  the  ability  of  the  city  government,  and 
with  ruin  staring  them  in  the  face  its  citizens 
had  no  choice  but  either  to  abandon  their  homes 
and  start  in  business  in  some  other  place  or  to 
remain  where  they  were  and  rescue  Galveston. 
They  quickly  discovered  that  responsibility  under 
the  existing  charter  was  divided  and  dissipated 
and  that  their  first  need  was  the  simplification 
of  their  form  of  government  in  order  to  con- 
centrate responsibility.  They  asked  the  state 
legislature  to  change  the  charter  and  vest  in 
a  small  board  all  the  legislative  and  executive 
authority  of  the  city.  The  legislature  made 
the  necessary  changes  and  the  experiment  began 
in  the  autumn  of  1901.  The  governing  body  of 
the  city  was  made  a  small  board  of  five  members, 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    99 

a  mayor-president  and  four  associates,  the  mayor 
and  two  of  his  associates  appointed  by  the  gov- 
ernor, the  two  others  elected  at  large.  The  ap- 
pointment by  the  governor  was  subsequently 
declared  unconstitutional  by  the  courts,  and 
beginning  in  1903  all  the  members  of  the  board 
were  made  elective. 

The  city's  public  affairs  are  apportioned  among 
four  departments,  and  the  board  by  majority 
vote  assigns  one  of  its  members  to  the  headship 
of  each  department.  The  mayor  is  general  man- 
ager, but,  except  in  certain  unusual  cases,  which 
do  not  concern  us,  has  no  greater  authority 
than  any  of  his  associates.  His  vote  counts  for 
no  more  than  the  vote  of  any  of  the  others.  The 
five  directors  are  all  chosen  at  the  same  time 
and  for  a  term  of  two  years.  The  election  is  a 
purely  local  election  and  takes  place  in  May. 
The  five  original  members  of  the  board  were  a 
lawyer,  a  banker,  a  wholesale  merchant,  a  real 
estate  dealer,  and  the  secretary  and  treasurer  of 
a  live  stock  company.  The  only  change  in  per- 
sonnel has  been  the  selection  of  another  wholesale 
merchant  to  succeed  the  lawyer,  who  died  in  1905. 

This  board  of  five  directors  not  only  rescued 
the  city  financially — its  bonds  rose  to  a  premium 
— but  remade  the  city  physically,  brought  its 
sanitary  condition  up  to  a  high  standard,  and 
under  them  the  city's  police  enforced  the  law. 
All  this  was  accomplished  with  a  saving  of  one 
third  in  the  running  expenses. 


ioo    Government  of  American  Cities 

Houston,  another  Texan  city,  stimulated  by 
the  example  of  Galveston,  secured  in  1905  a 
charter  granting  it  the  Galveston  form  of 
government,  and  the  charter  powers  of  that 
city  are  exercised  by  a  board  of  five  directors, 
a  mayor  and  four  aldermen,  all  elected  on  a 
general  ticket.  In  Houston  four  of  the  five  men 
chosen  as  directors  were  well  known  in  local 
politics  and  had  held  city  office.  The  same 
results  have  been  accomplished  as  in  Galveston, — 
running  expenses  reduced,  debts  paid  off,  physical 
appearance  of  the  city  bettered,  sanitation  im- 
proved, water  and  other  public  services  made 
efficient,  law  enforced.  Other  Texan  cities  have 
applied  for  and  been  granted  similar  charters, 
as  have  also  the  cities  of  Lewiston,  l  in  Idaho, 
and  Haverhill2  and  Gloucester,3  in  Massachu- 
setts. By  special  acts  of  the  state  legislature, 
Iowa,4  Kansas,  s  North  Dakota,6  South  Da- 
kota7 in  1907  and  Mississippi8  in  1908  each 
enacted  a  general  law  under  which  cities  may, 
if  they  choose,  have  charters  embodying  the 
general  features  of  the  Galveston  plan.9  The 

1  Laws  of  1907,  House  bill  No.  iai. 

2  Laws  of  1908,  Chapter  574. 

3  Laws  of  1908,  Chapter  6n. 

*  Laws  of  1907,  Chapter  48. 

5  Laws  of  1907,  Chapters  114,  123. 

6  Laws  of  1907,  Chapter  45. 

7  Laws  of  1907,  Chapter  86. 

*  Laws  of  1908,  Chapter  108. 

9  Des  Moines  and  Cedar  Rapids  (Iowa),  Leavenworth 
(Kansas),  Mandan  (North  Dakota),  Sioux  Falls  (South 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    101 

Iowa  and  South  Dakota  laws  were  not  content 
with  simplifying  the  city  charter  and  concentrat- 
ing the  responsibility  for  local  government  in  the 
hands  of  a  small  board  of  directors  locally  elected. 
In  order  the  more  surely  to  secure  direct  control 
by  the  people  over  the  local  government  they 
incorporated  provisions  for  the  initiative,  the 
referendum,  and  the  recall. 

The  Newport  plan. 

In  the  New  England  town  a  board  of  selectmen 
elected  by  the  general  body  of  the  voters  has  im- 
mediate charge  of  the  town  administrative  serv- 
ice; but  the  corporate  powers  of  the  town  are 
exercised  directly  by  the  voters  themselves  as- 
sembled in  town  meeting  and  the  selectmen  are 
subject  to  the  orders  and  resolutions  there 
adopted.  Many  New  England  towns,  even  after 
they  have  grown  so  populous  as  to  be  properly 
rated  as  cities,  have  clung  to  this  town  meeting 
plan  as  on  the  whole  securing  a  local  government 
more  nearly  in  accord  with  the  local  public  opinion 
than  any  of  the  more  elaborate  plans  that  have 
been  substituted  in  its  stead  when  a  general  gather- 
ing of  the  voters  in  one  meeting  place  has  become 
impossible.  Newport,  Rhode  Island,  since  Janu- 

Dakota),  have  adopted  such  charters.  The  Des  Moines 
plan  of  city  government  was  held  constitutional  by  the 
Iowa  Supreme  Court  in  Eckerson  v.  Des  Moines  (115  N. 
W.  177). 


102    Government  of  American  Cities 

ary,  1907,  has  been  trying  an  experiment 1  intended 
to  demonstrate  that  the  essential  features  of  gov- 
ernment by  town  meeting  may  be  applied  success- 
fully in  a  city  of  twenty-five  thousand  inhabitants. 
To  supply  the  place  of  the  ancient  town  meeting 
and  to  perform  its  functions,  Newport  elects  a 
delegate  council  so  numerous  as  to  be  really  repre- 
sentative of  the  general  body  of  the  voters  and 
yet  not  so  numerous  as  to  prevent  its  meeting 
together.  Each  of  the  five  wards  of  the  city  has 
thirty-nine  delegates — thirteen  are  elected  annu- 
ally for  a  term  of  three  years — to  a  "Represen- 
tative Council"  of  one  hundred  and  ninety-five 
members  who  serve  without  pay.  The  council  is 
the  judge  of  the  election  of  its  own  members, 
chooses  its  own  chairman,  and  adopts  its  own  rules 
of  procedure.  The  records  of  its  proceedings  are 
public.  Any  voter  and  any  taxpayer  (man  or 
woman)  may  attend  its  meetings  and  speak,  but 
only  members  may  vote.  The  representative 
council  makes  up  the  budget,  levies  the  taxes, 
makes  all  the  appropriations,  fixes  the  salaries  of 
the  city  employes,  elects  and  removes  city  offi- 
cials not  elected  by  popular  vote,  and  in  general 
is  vested  with  all  the  legislative  powers  possessed 
by  the  city.  Any  twenty-five  of  its  members  or 
the  board  of  aldermen  by  filing  a  written  request 
with  the  city  clerk  can  require  a  meeting  of  the 
council  to  be  held. 

To  supply  the  place  and  perform  the  functions 
1  Laws  of  Rhode  Island,  1906,  Chapter  1,392. 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    103 

of  the  selectmen  of  a  New  England  town,  a  mayor 
and  five  aldermen,  one  from  each  ward,  are  elected 
annually.  They  are  paid  salaries  and  have  im- 
mediate charge  of  the  city's  administrative  service 
subject  to  the  orders  of  the  council.  They  must 
attend  the  meetings  of  the  council  and  give  any 
information  requested. 

The  Newport  plan  includes  both  the  initiative 
and  the  referendum  as  to  public  expenditures. 
At  the  council's  meeting  in  January,  its  chairman 
must  appoint  a  committee  of  twenty-five,  five 
from  each  ward,  to  prepare  a  budget  for  the  en- 
suing year  and  submit  it  for  the  action  of  the 
council  at  a  later  meeting.  This  budget  must  be 
printed  and  sent  to  all  taxpayers *  at  least  seven 
days  before  it  is  acted  upon.  No  vote  or  appro- 
priation involving  the  expenditure  of  more  than 
$10,000  becomes  operative  for  seven  days.  If 
within  this  period  a  petition  is  filed  signed  by  one 
hundred  and  fifty  taxpaying  voters — there  must 
be  at  least  ten  from  each  ward — the  proposition 

i  Under  the  constitution  of  Rhode  Island  only  persons  who 
paid  taxes  on  at  least  $134.00  of  property  in  the  preceding 
year  can  vote  for  members  of  a  city  council  or  on  a  proposi- 
tion to  propose  a  tax  in  any  city  or  involving  the  expenditure 
of  city  money.  The  taxpayer  vote  of  Newport  numbers 
approximately  3,900,  the  general  electorate  includes  about 
1,200  more.  The  city  election  occurs  on  the  first  Monday 
of  December,  approximately  a  month  after  the  general 
election.  Candidates  for  mayor  are  voted  for  by  the  general 
electorate  of  the  city.  The  taxpayer  vote  of  each  ward  chooses 
its  representatives  in  the  council.  The  alderman  from  the 
ward  is  chosen  by  the  taxpayer  vote  of  the  entire  city. 


104    Government  of  American  Cities 

must  be  submitted  to  the  general  taxpaying 
electorate  of  the  city  for  ratification.  A  petition 
signed  by  one  hundred  taxpaying  voters  can 
compel  the  council  to  act  upon  any  proposition 
for  the  expenditure  of  more  than  $10,000,  and  if 
the  council's  action  be  adverse,  three  hundred  tax- 
paying  voters — there  must  be  at  least  twenty 
from  each  ward — can  by  petition  compel  the 
proposition  to  be  submitted  to  the  taxpaying 
electorate  of  the  city. 

Nominations  to  the  elective  city  offices  are 
made  by  filing  nomination  papers  at  least  twelve 
days  before  election.  Nomination  papers  for  a 
member  of  the  council  must  be  signed  by  at  least 
thirty  taxpayers  of  the  ward;  nomination  for 
alderman  by  at  least  one  hundred  taxpayers  of 
the  city ;  for  mayor  by  at  least  two  hundred  and 
fifty  of  the  general  electorate.  Every  nomination 
paper  must  contain  the  acceptance  of  the  nomina- 
tion by  the  candidate  and  the  names  and  ad- 
dresses of  the  nominators.  No  partisan  political 
statements  or  emblems  are  permitted  to  appear 
on  the  nomination  paper  or  on  the  election  day 
ballots. 

The  government  of  the  city  has  shown  marked 
improvement  during  the  two  years  since  the  new 
plan  was  inaugurated.  Its  advocates  lay  special 
stress  upon  its  separation  of  the  taxing  and  spend- 
ing authority.  The  Newport  plan  is  another 
example  of  the  determination  to  find  a  way  to 
compel  city  government  to  be  conducted  in  ac- 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    105 

cordance  with  the  local  public  opinion.  There  are 
indications  already  of  its  serious  consideration  by 
other  cities. 

The  Initiative,  the  Referendum,  and  ike  Recall  as 
applied  to  the  conduct  of  city  government. 

Each  of  these  methods  of  enforcing  the  popular 
will  takes  various  forms.  The  initiative  may  be 
described  generally  as  a  right  granted  by  law  to 
any  group  of  voters,  comprising  at  least  a  given 
proportion  of  the  electorate,  to  submit  and 
compel  action  upon  a  proposed  law  of  its  own 
drafting.  Sometimes  the  submission  is  to  the 
legislature,  sometimes  to  the  direct  vote  of  the 
general  electorate  without  the  intervention  of 
the  legislature;  sometimes,  in  the  event  of  un- 
favorable action  by  the  legislature  upon  the 
proposed  measure,  the  initiative  compels  its 
subsequent  submission  to  the  voters  at  large  at 
a  special  or  general  election.  Under  the  referen- 
dum a  similar  group  of  voters  may  make  nugatory 
a  law  enacted  by  the  legislature  unless  it  be 
ratified  at  a  subsequent  popular  election.  Under 
the  recall  a  similar  group  of  voters  may  compel 
an  elected  public  officer,  before  his  statutory 
term  expires,  to  secure  the  approval  of  his  official 
conduct  by  a  popular  vote  or  give  way  to  a 
successor. 

Some  form  of  the  initiative,  the  referendum, 
or  the  recall ,  and  sometimes  of  all  three,  is  already 


io6    Government  of  American  Cities 

in  experimental  use  in  many  cities  and  the  num- 
•ber  is  constantly  growing. 1 

The  referendum  as  to  state  legislation  is  pro- 
vided for  in  the  constitution  of  Nevada,2  and 
both  the  initiative  and  the  referendum  in  the 
constitutions  of  South  Dakota, 3  Utah,4  Oregon,5 
Montana,6  Oklahoma,7  Maine8  and  Missouri.9 
In  North  Dakota,  initiative  and  referendum 
amendments  are  pending  in  the  state  legislature. 
Under  specific  provisions  of  the  constitutions 
of  Oregon, 10  Oklahoma,  * 1  South  Dakota  3  and 
Maine,8  cities  enjoy  the  rights  of  initiative  and 
referendum.  Attention  has  already  been  called 
to  the  initiative  and  referendum  features  of 
the  "Commission'*  plan  of  city  government 
under  the  statutes  of  Iowa  and  South  Dakota. 
Texas  by  special  act  * 2  has  granted  the  referendum 

•  No    attempt  is  made    to    give  a  complete  and  com- 
prehensive list;   but  the  strength  and  widespread  character 
of  this  movement  to  secure  popular  control  of  elected  of- 
ficials is  sufficiently  shown  by  the  facts  set  forth  in  the  text. 

a  Art.  XIX.,  Sees,  i,  2,  adopted  1904. 

3  Art.  III.,  Sec.  i,  adopted  1898. 

«  Art.  VI.,  Sees,  i,  22,  adopted  1900;  the  state  consti- 
tutional provision  is  not  self-executing  and  the  legislature 
has  not  yet  passed  an  enabling  act. 

s  Art.  IV.,  Sec.  i,  adopted  1902 ;  Art.  XVII.,  Sec.  i,  adopted 
1906. 

•  Art.  V.,  Sec.  i,  adopted  1906. 

»  Art.  V.,  Sees.  1-8,  Art.  XXIV.,  Sec.  3,  adopted  1907. 

•  Art.  IV.,  Part  3,  Sees.  17-22,  adopted  1908. 
»  Art.  IV.,  Sec.  i,  adopted  1908. 

i°  Art.  IV.,  Sec.  i-a,  adopted  1906. 

11  Art.  XVIII,  Sees.  4a-4e,  adopted  1907. 

12  Special  Laws  of  1907,  Chapter  7. 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    107 

to  Fort  Worth;  and  Massachusetts  the  initiative 
and  referendum  to  Haverhill1  and  Gloucester.2 

Lincoln  and  Omaha,  in  Nebraska,  have  adopted 
the  initiative  and  referendum  under  the  authority 
of  a  general  statute.  3  Montana,  in  1907,  enacted 
a  similar  statute.4  The  right  of  initiative  is 
incorporated  in  the  laws  granting  a  commission 
form  of  government  to  Dallas,  Texas,  and  Lewis- 
ton,  Idaho. 

Under  the  home-made  charter  provisions  of 
the  constitutions  of  Missouri,  California,  Washing- 
ton, and  Colorado,  many  cities  have  incorporated 
the  right  of  initiative  or  referendum  (very  fre- 
quently both)  in  their  charters,  s 

Many  of  the  cities  in  California  and  Washington, 
enjoying  home-made  charters,  have  also  adopted 
the  recall;  for  example,  Los  Angeles  in  1903, 
San  Diego,  San  Bernardino,  Pasadena,  and  Fresno 
in  1905;  Santa  Monica,  Alameda,  Long  Beach, 
Vallejo,  Riverside,  and  San  Francisco  in  1907, 
Seattle  in  1906  and  Everett  in  1907. 

The  recall  has  been  provided  by  statute  for 
cities  governed  under  the  commission  plan  in 

»  Chapter  574,  Laws  of  1908. 

2  Chapter  611,  Laws  of  1908. 

»  Laws  of  1897,  Chapter  32. 

«  Laws  of  1907,  Chapter  62. 

s  For  example,  Kansas  City  in  Missouri;  San  Francisco, 
Vallejo,  Los  Angeles,  Fresno,  San  Diego,  Sacramento,  River- 
side, Eureka,  Alameda,  Santa  Cruz,  Long  Beach,  Santa 
Monica,  Pasadena,  San  Bernardino,  in  California;  Everett, 
Spokane,  Seattle,  in  Washington;  Denver  in  Colorado. 


io8    Government  of  American  Cities 

Iowa  and  South  Dakota,  and  by  special  act 
in  Idaho  for  the  city  of  Lewiston.  Texas 
has  granted  by  special  legislation  the  right  of 
recall  to  El  Paso,1  Fort  Worth,2  Denison,3 
and  Dallas,  ^  and  Washington5  in  1907  extended 
the  right  of  recall  in  the  case  of  councilmen  to 
all  cities  of  the  second  class.6 

Haverhill,  Massachusetts,  has  the  right  of 
recall  by  the  terms  of  the  recent  statute  already 
noted,  granting  it  a  commission  form  of  gov- 
ernment. Every  city  in  Oregon  may  exercise 
the  initiative,  the  referendum,  and  the  recall.7 

THE  NEW  CHARTER  PROPOSED  FOR  BOSTON. 

The  plan  of  city  government  recommended  by 
the  commission  appointed  to  frame  a  new  charter 
for  Boston  is  published  as  this  book  is  going 
through  the  press.8  The  leading  features  of  the 
commission's  plan  are:  The  simplification  of 
the  structural  plan  of  the  city  government;  the 
centralizing  of  responsibility  for  the  exercise  of 
such  powers  as  are  granted  the  city;  the  require- 

1  Special  laws  of  1907,  Chapter  5. 

2  Special  laws  of  1907,  Chapter  7. 

3  Special  laws  of  1907,  Chapter  33. 
*  Special  laws  of  1907,  Chapter  71. 

s  Laws  of  1907,  Chapter  241,  Sec.  15. 

6  10,000  to  20,000  population. 

'  Const.  Art.  IV.,  as  amended  1906;  Art.  II.,  as  amended 
1908. 

»  Report  to  the  General  Court  of  the  Boston  Finance  Com- 
mission, January  29,  1909. 


Local  Self-Governmcnt  the  Goal    109 

ment  that  experts  shall  have  charge  of  the  ad- 
ministrative departments;  the  separation  of  city 
elections  from  all  others;  a  simplified  municipal 
ballot  and  the  abolition  of  party  nominations; 
the  creation  of  a  permanent  commission  of  five 
residents  of  the  city  to  be  appointed  by  the 
governor  to  investigate  the  operations  of  the 
city  government  and  make  reports  and  recom- 
mendations. 

Excluding  innumerable  minor  officials  and  six 
officials  appointed  by  the  governor,  Boston's  city 
government  when  the  commission  was  appointed 
in  July,  1907,  was  conducted  by  242  persons, 
of  whom  ninety-seven — viz.,  a  mayor,  a  two-cham- 
bered city  legislature  (thirteen  aldermen,  seventy- 
five  members  of  the  common  council),  a  school 
committee  of  five  members,  three  street  com- 
missioners— were  elected  at  the  polls  and  four  were 
elected  by  one  or  both  branches  of  the  city  council. 
The  remainder  were  heads  of  some  fifty  separate 
departments.  The  mayor  appointed  ninety -nine 
subject  to  confirmation  by  the  board  of  aldermen, 
nine  upon  the  recommendation  of  outside  bodies, 
and  thirty-three  upon  his  own  initiative  and  with- 
out need  of  other  than  his  own  approval.  The 
commission  leaves  the  school  committee  undis- 
turbed,J  but  reduces  the  remaining  officials  to 

*  The  school  committee  of  Boston  was  reorganized  in  1905 
(Chap.  349,  Laws  of  1905).  It  has  five  members  elected  by 
the  city  at  large.  As  originally  constituted,  two  were  elected 
for  three  years,  two  for  two  years,  and  one  for  one  year,  and 


no    Government  of  American  Cities 

be  elected  at  the  polls  from  ninety -two  to  ten,  viz., 
the  mayor  and  the  city  council  which  is  made  a 
single  body  of  nine  members,  three  elected  each 
year  by  the  voters  at  large  for  a  term  of  three 
years. 

The  mayor  has  the  absolute  power  of  appointing 
any  head  of  a  city  department  or  member  of  a 
municipal  board  subject  to  these  qualifications: 
"  They  shall  be  recognized  experts  in  such  work  as 
may  devolve  upon  the  incumbents  of  said  offices, or 
persons  specially  fitted  by  education,  training,  and 
experience  to  perform  the  same,  and  (except  the 
election  commissioners  who  shall  remain  subject  to 
the  provisions  of  existing  laws)  shall  be  appointed 
without  regard  to  party -affiliation  or  to  residence 
at  the  time  of  appointment."  And  the  mayor's 
appointment  does  not  become  operative  unless 
at  least  a  majority  of  the  state  civil-service  com- 
mission certifies  within  thirty  days  that  they 
have  made  a  careful  inquiry  into  the  qualifications 
of  the  appointee  and  that  in  their  opinion  he  is 
qualified  by  education,  training,  and  experience 
for  said  office.  All  appointments  are  for  a  four- 
year  term,  but  the  mayor  may  remove  at  pleasure. 

The  annual  appropriation  bill  or  budget  origi- 
nates with  the  mayor.  The  council  may  eliminate 
or  reduce  but  cannot  increase  or  add  items. 
"  Every  appropriation  and  every  other  act,  order, 

it  was  provided  that  at  every  succeeding  city  election  there 
should  be  elected  for  three  years  so  many  members  as  were 
necessary  to  fill  vacancies  caused  by  expiring  terms. 


Local  Self-Government  the  Goal    1 1 1 

resolution,  and  vote  of  the  city  council  shall  be 
presented  to  the  mayor,"  and  if  returned  within 
fifteen  days  "  to  the  city  council  with  his  objections 
thereto  the  same  shall  be  void."  "If  the  same 
involves  the  expenditure  of  money,  the  mayor 
may  approve  some  of  the  items  in  whole  or  in 
part  and  disapprove  other  of  the  items  in  whole 
or  in  part,  and  only  such  items  or  parts  of  items 
as  he  approves  shall  be  in  force  and  such  items 
or  parts  of  items  as  he  disapproves  shall  be  void. " 

The  mayor  and  council,  except  as  to  a  few 
departments  specifically  named,  are  given  full 
authority  to  organize  the  entire  administrative 
service  of  the  city  and  to  regulate  the  salaries. 

The  mayor  at  any  time  may  attend  and  address 
the  city  council  in  person  or  through  the  head  of  a 
city  department  or  a  member  of  a  board  upon  such 
subject  as  he  may  desire,  and  the  council  may  re- 
quest specific  information  on  any  municipal  mat- 
ters from  the  mayor.  On  a  week's  written  notice 
the  mayor  must  attend  a  meeting  of  the  council 
personally  or  through  a  head  of  a  department  or 
a  member  of  a  board  "and  publicly  answer  all 
questions  that  may  be  asked  relating  to  the  sub- 
ject matter  of  said  request. " 

Municipal  elections  are  held  on  the  Tuesday 
after  the  second  Monday  in  January,  and  the  terms 
of  officers  then  elected  begin  on  the  first  Monday 
of  the  following  February.  Primaries  for  the 
nomination  to  elective  city  offices  are  forbidden. 
A  candidate  must  be  nominated  by  a  petition 


ii2    Government  of  American  Cities 

signed  by  5,000  qualified  voters  in  order  to  have  his 
name  printed  upon  the  official  election-day  ballot. 
The  names  of  candidates  for  the  same  office  are 
printed  upon  the  official  ballot  in  the  order  in 
which  they  may  be  drawn  by  the  board  of  election 
commissioners  in  the  presence  of  the  candidates 
or  their  representatives.  No  political  designation 
of  any  sort  is  permitted  on  the  municipal  ballot. 

The  mayor  is  always  elected  for  a  four-years' 
term,  but  at  the  regular  state  election  in  November 
during  his  second  year  of  service  the  question  is 
submitted  to  the  general  electorate :  * '  Shall  there 
be  an  election  for  mayor  at  the  next  municipal 
election?"  If  a  majority  of  the  voters  answer, 
this  question  in  the  affirmative,  the  name  of  the 
person  then  holding  the  office  of  mayor  (other 
than  an  acting  mayor)  is  put  on  the  ballot  at 
the  municipal  election  in  the  following  January. 
' '  If  prior  to  October  first  in  the  second  year  of  his 
term  the  mayor  shall  file  with  the  secretary  of  the 
commonwealth  a  written  notice  that  he  does  not 
desire  said  question  to  appear  upon  the  ballot  at 
said  state  election,  it  shall  be  omitted;  his  term 
of  office  shall  expire  on  the  first  Monday  of  Febru- 
ary following,  and  there  shall  be  an  election  for 
mayor  in  said  city  held  in  January  next  following 
said  state  election."  If  the  mayor  then  wishes 
to  be  renominated,  he  must  file  a  petition  with 
5,000  signatures  as  in  the  case  of  other  candidates 
to  elective  city  office. 

There  is   to  be   a  permanent   "finance   com- 


Local  S elf-Government  the  Goal   113 

mission"  of  five  paid  members,  appointed  by  the 
governor,  one  each  year  for  the  term  of  five  years. 
This  commission  is  "to  investigate  any  and  all 
matters  relating  to  appropriations,  loans,  expendi- 
tures, accounts,  and  methods  of  administration 
affecting  the  city  of  Boston  or  the  county  of 
Suffolk  or  any  department  thereof  that  may  appear 
to  the  commission  to  require  investigation,  and  to 
report  from  time  to  time  to  the  mayor,  the  city 
council,  the  governor,  or  the  general  court. " 
If  requested  by  the  mayor,  city  auditor,  or  the 
city  treasurer  the  finance  commission  is  also  to 
investigate  the  facts  with  regard  to  any  claim 
against  the  city  and  report;  "and  pending  said 
report  payment  shall  be  withheld."  The  com- 
mission is  amply  equipped  with  power  for  all 
purposes  of  investigation.  It  may  prescribe 
reasonable  rules  for  the  conduct  of  hearings; 
compel  the  attendance  and  the  testimony  under 
oath  of  witnesses,  the  production  of  books  and 
papers;  and  procure  orders  for  depositions  of 
witnesses  out  of  the  state.  The  city  must  ap- 
propriate annually  a  sum  sufficient  to  pay  the 
salaries  of  the  members  of  the  commission  and 
the  further  sum  of  at  least  $25,000;  and  the 
commission  is  authorized  to  spend  in  its  work 
"such  additional  sums  as  may  be  appropriated 
for  the  purpose  by  the  mayor  and  city  council. " 


CHAPTER  VIII 

CITY  GOVERNMENT  IS  GOVERNMENT 

THE  administrative  functions  of  a  city  govern- 
ment are  so  overwhelmingly  preponderant 
that  some  persons  hold  that  it  has  no  political 
side  whatever.  Likening  a  municipal  corporation 
to  a  private  business  corporation  and  the  city's 
voters  to  stockholders,  they  argue  that  no  question 
of  politics  is  involved  in  the  management  of  a 
private  corporation  and  that  the  consideration  of 
such  questions  is  equally  out  of  place  in  the  con- 
duct of  a  municipal  corporation;  that,  in  short, 
city  government  is  business,  not  politics,  and  that 
the  way  of  escape  from  the  evils  of  bad  city  govern- 
ment is  to  recognize  that  all  "  politics "  must  be 
eliminated  from  its  conduct  and  to  treat  it  as  a 
purely  business  matter. 

All  will  agree  that  even  a  business  enterprise 
must  be  conducted  in  accordance  with  some 
policy  and  that  some  one  must  determine  the 
policy.  If  the  policy  be  unwise  the  enterprise 
will  fail,  however  honest  or  capable  its  adminis- 
tration; and  the  enterprise  will  equally  fail,  be  its 
policy  never  so  wise,  if  administration  of  the 

114 


City  Government  Is  Government    115 

policy  is  dishonest  or  incapable.  It  is  self-evident 
that  no  business  enterprise  is  possible  without 
first  determining  the  policy  to  be  followed  and 
then  administering  the  policy  determined  upon; 
and  that  honest  and  capable  administration  does 
not  involve  opinions  by  the  members  of  the  ad- 
ministrative staff  on  the  merits  of  the  business 
policy  adopted.  No  successful  business  man  fails 
to  recognize  the  soundness  of  these  principles 
and  to  apply  them  in  the  practical  conduct  of 
any  undertaking  for  whose  success  or  failure 
he  is  responsible.  In  the  business  world  the 
distinction  between  policy  and  administration 
is  universally  recognized,  and  the  opinions  of  the 
administrative  staff  of  a  business  in  regard  to 
the  policy  of  the  business  are  not  considered  to 
be  any  part  of  the  proper  performance  of  their 
administrative  duties.  The  policy  is  determined 
by  the  owners  of  the  business  or  their  duly  author- 
ized representatives. 

If  the  business  is  incorporated,  all  matters  of 
corporate  policy  are  determined  by  the  stock- 
holders or  by  the  board  of  directors  whom  they 
elect.  What  the  policy  of  the  corporation  should 
be  is  often  the  subject  of  serious  disputes.  Shall 
the  surplus  earnings  be  distributed  as  increased 
dividends  or  used  to  enlarge  the  plant  or  extend 
the  business?  The  differences  of  opinion  that 
such  a  question  will  call  forth  are  often  very  wide 
and  parties  will  be  formed  among  the  stockholders 
to  secure  the  election  of  a  board  of  directors  that 


n6    Government  of  American  Cities 

will  represent  the  one  or  the  other  policy  or  some 
compromise  between  the  two  extremes  of  opinion. 
Instances  of  such  partisan  struggle  for  control  of 
business  policy  are  constantly  occurring.  That 
the  question  is  a  purely  business  one  and  the 
corporation  a  purely  business  corporation  elimin- 
ates neither  parties  nor  partisanship. 

Nor  does  any  one  expect  it  to  be  otherwise.  It  is 
a  matter  of  common  knowledge  that  any  question, 
the  decision  of  which  men  believe  to  be  deeply 
affecting  their  interests,  will  arouse  partisan- 
ship and  create  parties  in  the  effort  to  control  the 
decision.  If,  then,  the  city's  voters  are  to  regard 
themselves  as  stockholders  of  the  municipal 
corporation  they  will  justly  feel  themselves  en- 
titled to  a  direct  voice  in  the  decision  of  the 
policy  of  the  corporation  and,  to  choose  direc- 
tors who  will  represent  the  prevailing  opinion 
among  the  stockholders;  and  parties  will  be 
formed  and  partisanship  aroused  to  give  expres- 
sion and  effect  to  this  prevailing  opinion. 

What  is  this  in  essence  but  politics,  and  parti- 
san politics  at  that?  Rightly  understood,  politics 
is  but  the  application  in  the  decision  of  questions 
of  public  policy  of  the  same  principles  and  the 
use  of  the  same  methods  that  must  be  applied 
and  used  in  the  determination  of  the  policy  of  a 
private  business  undertaking. 

The  truth  is  that  city  government  in  its  essential 
nature  is  government ;  as  much  so  as  a  state  gov- 
ernment or  the  national  government  and,  like 


City  Government  Is  Government    117 

them,  its  conduct  is  a  public,  not  a  private  matter. 
Like  them  also,  and  in  this  respect  it  does  not 
differ  from  private  business  undertakings,  its 
policy-determining  functions  are  quite  separate 
and  distinct  in  character  from  its  policy-ad- 
ministering functions.  Because,  however,  the 
chief  activities  of  city  government,  as  of  a  private 
business  corporation,  are  on  its  administrative 
side,  and  efficient  administration  has  properly  no 
concern  with  opinions  on  those  public  questions 
which  arouse  partisanship  and  divide  men  into 
opposing  parties,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  or  over- 
looked that  without  a  policy  there  could  be  no 
administration;  that  to  determine  a  public  policy 
is  politics,  and  that  municipal  public  policy  is  not 
an  administrative  affair  and  is  not  in  any  sense  a 
private  matter. 

When  we  speak  of  the  necessity  of  applying 
business  principles  in  the  conduct  of  city  govern- 
ment, we  are  altogether  right,  if  we  mean  that  its 
policy  should  be  wisely  determined  and,  when 
determined,  should  be  honestly  and  efficiently 
administered  by  men  selected  without  reference 
to  their  opinion  of  the  policy;  but  we  are  alto- 
gether wrong  if  we  imagine  that  politics  can  be 
eliminated  from  the  determination  of  the  policy, 
for  politics  is  essential  to  its  determination. 
Shall  a  city  build  a  system  of  docks,  establish 
parks  and  parkways,  construct  water-works,  own  or 
operate  transit  lines,  undertake  the  erection  of  elec- 
tric lighting  and  power  plants  ? — these  are  ques- 


n8    Government  of  American  Cities 

tions  of  public  policy  which  will  divide  the  city's 
voters  into  opposing  parties.  These  and  all  like 
questions  are  political.  The  actual  building  of 
the  docks,  laying  out  of  the  parks,  construction 
of  the  water- works,  organization  of  the  transit 
service,  erection  and  equipment  of  the  electrical 
plants  is  each  a  purely  administrative  matter. 
Not  one  of  them  could  be  made  the  basis  for  any 
sharp  difference  of  opinion,  much  less  could  it 
arouse  any  feeling  of  partisanship.  Were  the 
question  put  to  the  people,  "  Shall  the  docks  be 
built  honestly  and  economically  under  the  super- 
vision of  competent  engineers? "  not  a  vote  would 
be  cast  in  the  negative.  Administrative  matters 
involve  no  question  of  policy  in  the  political 
sense,  but  this  in  no  way  diminishes  the  vital 
importance  of  our  recognizing  that  there  must 
first  be  a  policy  before  there  can  be  an  administra- 
tion of  the  policy;  that  the  policy-determining 
function  of  a  city  government,  as  of  all  govern- 
ment, is  a  political  function  and  that  its  exercise 
necessarily  involves  the  existence  and  creation  of 
political  parties  and  political  partisanship. 

There  is  no  difference  in  kind  between  the 
parties  created  and  the  partisanship  displayed 
in  a  campaign  for  and  against  the  city's  ownership 
and  operation  of  transit  lines  or  an  electrical  plant 
and  the  parties  and  partisanship  in  a  campaign 
for  and  against  a  protective  tariff.  The  issues, 
the  parties,  and  the  partisanship  are  political  in 
the  one  case  as  in  the  other.  Politics,  then,  is  an 


City  Government  Is  Government   119 

essential  element  in  the  conduct  of  city  govern, 
ment,  for  the  policy  which  controls  its  conduct 
cannot  be  determined  without  politics. 

The  same  mistaken  reasoning  that  has  drawn 
from  the  marked  analogy  between  a  municipal 
and  a  private  business  corporation  the  conclusion 
that  city  government  is  business,  not  politics,  has 
a  striking  illustration  in  the  assumption  that  a 
private  business  corporation  has  no  legislative 
functions  and,  therefore,  that  a  city  government 
should  have  no  legislative  power.  This  assump- 
tion fails  to  take  due  account  of  the  principles 
and  methods  of  corporate  management.  A  cor- 
poration acting  except  in  accordance  with  some 
corporate  policy  is  inconceivable.  When  the 
votes  of  the  stockholders  of  a  business  corporation, 
or  of  the  board  of  directors  whom  the  stock- 
holders have  elected  for  the  purpose,  determine 
the  corporate  policy,  how  does  this  differ  in 
essential  character  from  the  determination  of 
the  policy  of  the  state  by  the  votes  of  its  citizens, 
or  of  the  members  of  the  legislature  whom  the 
citizens  have  elected  for  the  purpose?  The 
quality  of  the  act  is  the  same  in  each  case.  It  is 
the  determination  of  policy ;  and  this  is  essentially 
a  legislative  function.  A  czar  may  determine 
policy  by  arbitrary  decree,  a  parliament  by  enact- 
ing a  law,  the  people  at  large  by  approving  or 
rejecting  a  written  constitution,  and  the  stock- 
holders or  directors  of  a  corporation  by  adopting 
resolutions, — czar,  parliament,  people,  stock- 


1 20    Government  of  American  Cities 

holders,  and  directors  are  alike  legislating.  Public 
legislation  may  be  embodied  in  statutes,  private 
legislation  in  the  records  of  a  corporation, — • 
each  is  legislation.  The  argument  that  because 
city  government  is  corporate  in  form  it,  therefore, 
needs  no  legislative  power  is  thus  seen  to  be  a 
pure  non  sequitur,  and  not  the  less  so  even  if  city 
government  be  regarded  wholly  as  a  business  cor- 
poration. For  a  business  corporation  must  have  a 
corporate  policy,  or  cease  to  do  business ;  and  the 
determination  of  policy  is  a  legislative  function. 

The  argument  is  fatally  defective  for  another 
reason.  A  vital  distinction  between  a  municipal 
corporation  and  a  business  corporation,  as  also 
between  the  state  and  a  business  corporation,  is 
that  the  former  is  primarily  and  essentially  public, 
while  the  latter  is  private.  The  policy  of  the 
latter  is  the  private  affair  of  individuals;  in  the 
policy  of  the  former,  the  public  is  concerned  and 
no  one  disputes  that  the  determination  of  public 
policy  is  a  legislative  function.  And  when  demo- 
cratic principles  prevail,  just  as  the  voters  of 
a  state  will,  either  directly  or  by  representatives 
responsible  to  them,  determine  the  policy  of  the 
state,  so  the  voters  of  a  city  will,  either  directly 
or  by  representatives  responsible  to  them,  de- 
termine all  questions  of  city  policy.  Indeed,  it 
might  well  be  argued  that,  even  if  the  city  be 
regarded  as  a  business  corporation,  just  as  its 
stockholders  determine  directly  by  their  votes, 
or  by  the  action  of  the  directors  to  whom  they 


City  Government  Is  Government   121 

have  delegated  the  authority,  the  business  policy 
of  the  corporation,  so  the  citizens  of  a  city  who 
are  the  members  of  the  municipal  corporation 
should  determine  directly  by  their  votes,  or  by  the 
action  of  the  public  officials  to  whom  they  have 
delegated  the  requisite  authority,  the  policy  of 
the  city  government  (the  municipal  corporation). 

But  whether  we  regard  city  government  as  a 
business  corporation  or  as,  what  it  really  is,  a 
public  corporation  in  the  conduct  of  which  every 
citizen  of  the  city  has  a  vital  interest,  it  is  certain 
that  in  either  case  it  is  a  corporation;  and,  since 
a  corporation  cannot  act  except  pursuant  to  some 
corporate  policy,  if  the  policy  be  not  determined 
by  its  own  members,  recourse  must  be  had  to 
an  outside  authority  to  determine  the  policy. 
This  is  to  put  a  municipal  corporation  in  a  class 
by  itself  and  to  maintain  that,  unlike  any  other, 
it  should  have  no  policy  of  its  own,  but  that  one 
should  be  imposed  upon  it  by  outside  authority. 
The  outside  authority  in  this  case  is  of  necessity  the 
state  legislature. 

The  choice,  therefore,  lies  between  the  subjection 
of  the  city  government  to  the  state  legislature 
— that  is,  conforming  the  policy  of  the  municipal 
corporation  to  the  changing  moods  of  a  legislative 
body  which  is  in  no  proper  sense  representative 
of  or  responsible  to  the  members  of  the  corporation 
affected  by  the  legislation  enacted — or  permitting 
the  city  to  do  its  own  legislating.  For  legislation 
is  inevitable  in  either  event. 


122    Government  of  American  Cities 

Each  of  these  methods  has  been  long  and  tho- 
roughly tried.  In  the  United  States,  the  local  pol- 
icy of  the  city  has  been  whatever  a  state  legislature 
has  determined.  In  the  cities  of  Western  Europe, 
the  local  policy  of  the  city  has  been  determined  by 
a  locally  elected  city  legislature.  There  are  few, 
if,  indeed,  there  are  any,  students  of  American 
municipal  history  who  do  not  find  in  the  inter- 
ference by  the  state  legislature  with  the  conduct 
of  local  government  one  of  the  chief  causes  of  the 
misgovernment  of  American  cities;  and  those 
most  familiar  with  the  government  of  English 
cities  are  most  certain  that  a  principal  reason  for 
its  great  success,  as  compared  with  city  govern- 
ment in  the  United  States,  is  that  in  England  a 
city  is  regarded  as  a  self-governing  community. 

The  truth  is,  city  government,  although  cor- 
porate in  form,  is  government;  and,  while  its 
field  of  operation  is  far  more  limited  than  that 
of  the  state  or  the  nation,  just  in  so  far  as  for  any 
reason  it  is  denied  power  within  that  field  to 
exercise  its  due  authority,  it  is  necessarily  a  failure. 
The  people  of  a  city  are  as  much  entitled  to 
determine  the  public  policy  of  the  city  as  the 
people  of  a  state  to  determine  the  public  policy 
of  the  state,  or  the  people  of  the  nation  to  deter- 
mine the  national  policy.  The  wider  and  wider 
recognition  of  this  fact  is  the  underlying  cause 
of  the  growing  revolt  in  so  many  widely  separate 
parts  of  the  United  States  against  the  doctrine, 
once  accepted  without  question  and  universally 


City  Government  Is  Government  123 

applied,  that  the  city  was  merely  the  subordinate 
agent  of  the  state  and  as  such  was  entitled  to  have 
only  such  authority  as  the  state  legislature  might 
from  time  to  time  permit. 

As  the  conception  of  city  government  as  a  real 
government  has  gained  wider  and  wider  accept- 
ance, there  has  been  a  growing  realization  of  the 
need  of  making  those  charged  with  its  conduct 
more  directly  accountable  to  and  more  surely 
representative  of  the  people  subject  to  their 
authority.  This  explains  and  justifies  the  many 
changes  in  city  charters  during  the  last  twenty- 
five  years,  and  especially  in  the  last  ten,  looking 
toward  the  centering  of  power  and  of  responsibility 
for  the  use  of  the  power.  It  is  to  accomplish  this 
purpose,  and  because  it  was  clearly  seen  that 
greatly  simplifying  the  structural  plan  of  city 
government  would  be  a  most  important  aid 
towards  its  accomplishment,  that  Gal  vest  on  and 
the  cities  which  have  followed  Galveston's  lead 
have  centered  all  power  in  a  small  board  of  directors 
elected  directly  by  and  accountable  directly  to 
the  voters  of  the  city, — a  very  strict  application 
to  city  government  of  the  principles  of  corporate 
management.  The  same  simplification  of  struc- 
tural plan  is  strongly  recommended  by  the  com- 
missions appointed  in  1907  and  1908  to  frame  a 
new  charter  for  the  government  of  the  city  of 
New  York.  The  commissions  agree  in  urging  the 
enactment  of  a  brief  charter  setting  forth  suc- 
cinctly and  clearly  the  powers  granted  to  the 


124    Government  of  American  Cities 

city  and  in  entrusting  the  exercise  of  these  powers 
to  the  mayor  and  to  locally  elected  bodies,  one 
called  the  Board  of  Estimate,  to  be  vested  with 
the  city's  legislative  power  as  to  finance,  and 
the  other,  called  the  Common  Council,  which  is 
to  exercise  all  the  city's  legislative  power  not 
otherwise  specially  provided  for.1 

Protect  the  city  from  interference  by  the  state 
legislature,  clothe  the  city  with  ample  authority 
within  the  municipal  field,  simplify  the  structural 
plan  of  its  government,  centre  the  power  and  the 
accountability  for  its  exercise,  make  it  possible 
with  reasonable  effort  for  the  citizens  of  the  city 
to  enforce  the  accountability — were  the  recom- 
mendations of  the  able  men  on  this  commission. 
The  experience  of  cities  the  world  over  has  demon- 
strated that  these  recommendations  are  sound.2 

1  The  Board  of  Estimate  has  eight  members,  three  elected 
from  the  city  at  large,  and  one  from  each  of  the  five  bor- 
oughs into  which  the  city  is  divided;  the  Council  has  thirty- 
nine  members,  one  from  each  of  the  fourteen .  districts  in 
Manhattan,  eleven  in  Brooklyn,  six  in  the  Bronx,  five  in 
Richmond,  and  three  in  Queens. 

2  See  report  of  the  Charter  Revision  Commission  of   1907 
to  the  Governor  of  the  State  of  New  York  (November  30, 
1907);   and  the  Report  of  the  Charter  Revision  Commission 
of  1908  to  the  Legislature  of  1909  of  the  State  of  New  York. 
The  last-mentioned  report  is  not  yet  (January  29,  1909) 
completed. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  RELATION  OF  THE  CITY  TO  THE  STATE 

THE  city's  relation  to  the  state  is  a  dual  one. 
It  is  a  more  or  less  complete  local  govern- 
ment; it  may  be  one  of  the  state's  administrative 
agents  to  carry  out  a  general  state  policy.  In 
each  of  these  relations,  because,  in  theory  of  law, 
it  is  a  corporation,  the  city,  during  its  unfortu- 
nate past  in  the  United  States,  has  been  the  serf 
of  the  state,  although  there  is  no  legal  or  logical 
necessity  which  requires — much  less  is  there  any 
reason  of  sound  public  policy  which  justifies — the 
serfdom. 

The  city  as  local  government. 

A  city  like  other  corporations  derives  its  exis- 
tence and  its  power  to  act  from  the  state.  This 
is  the  only  fundamentally  necessary  connection 
between  a  city,  as  local  government,  and  the 
state.  It  needs  no  further  assistance  from  the 
state.  The  state's  necessary  connection  with  it 
begins  and  ends  with  its  creation  and  the  grant  of 
power  to  act;  just  as  an  ordinary  corporation, 
once  it  is  created  and  granted  sufficient  power  to 

125 


i26    Government  of  American  Cities 

manage  its  affairs,  has  no  further  need  of  resort 
to  the  state  in  order  to  conduct  its  business.  The 
more  completely  the  central  government, — the 
state, — grants  power  to  the  local  government, — 
the  city, — to  satisfy  the  local  needs,  the  less  occa- 
sion there  will  be  for  recourse  to  the  state.  If 
the  state  should  grant  once  for  all  sufficient  power 
to  the  city,  there  would  be  neither  need  nor  occasion 
for  further  activity  by  the  state  so  far  as  the  city 
is  concerned.  The  latter,  equipped  with  all 
the  necessary  local  governmental  powers,  would 
perform  all  the  functions  of  local  government. 
The  city,  as  a  local  government,  needs  from  the 
central  government,  the  state,  nothing  but  adequate 
power  to  exercise  the  functions  of  local  government. 

Nor,  if  this  be  done,  need  there  be  conflict  of 
authority  between  the  state  and  city  as  govern- 
ments because  a  city  is  located  within  the  physical 
boundaries  of  the  state.  The  distinction  between 
state  and  city  as  governments  is  not  one  of  topo- 
graphy, but  in  the  subject-matters  appropriate 
to  their  several  jurisdictions,  and,  when  each 
government  has  jurisdiction  over  the  same  subject- 
matter,  in  the  extent  or  scope  of  the  jurisdiction 
each  may  exercise. 

The  government  of  our  federal  union  and  the 
governments  of  the  states  which  compose  it  afford 
an  informing  illustration.  In  the  United  States, 
each  of  the  individual  states  is,  of  physical  neces- 
sity, situated  within  the  territorial  confines  of 
the  nation;  yet  the  supremacy  of  the  national 


The  City  and  the  State  127 

government  over  the  subject-matters  properly 
within  its  jurisdiction  does  not  at  all  prevent  each 
state  government  from  possessing  and  actively 
exercising  absolute  authority  within  its  own 
proper  domain.  Provided  each  keeps  within  its 
own  jurisdictional  field  there  is  no  sound  reason 
why  within  the  physical  area  of  the  city's  cor- 
porate limits  both  state  and  city  should  not  have 
and  exercise  full  power. 

The  practical  application  of  this  principle  does 
not  require  much  acumen  or  suggest  any  serious 
difficulty.  The  chief  functions  of  the  city  as  a 
local  government  are  (i)  the  determination  of  the 
local  public  policy  and  (2)  the  local  administration 
of  that  policy,  i.e.,  the  carrying  it  into  effect 
within  the  physical  area  of  the  city.  Why  should 
there  be  any  clash  with  the  state  in  the  exercise  of 
either  of  these  functions?  A  state  policy  is  either 
one  that  applies  throughout  the  state  and  is  to  be 
enforced  everywhere  within  the  state's  boundaries 
or  one  that  is  equally  applicable  to  all  the  cities 
and  is  to  be  enforced  alike  in  each  of  them;  a  city's 
policy  is  confined  within  the  city's  limits  and  is  not 
enforceable  beyond  them.  A  test  of  the  propriety 
or  impropriety  of  control  by  the  state  of  the 
public  policy  enforced  within  the  corporate  limits 
of  a  city  is  this :  Is  the  policy  in  question  a  part 
either  of  a  general  public  policy  embodied  in  a  law 
equally  applicable  to  every  part  of  the  state,  with- 
out no  less  than  within  the  limits  of  the  city  in 
question  or  of  a  general  public  policy  equally  ap- 


128     Government  of  American  Cities 

plicable  to  every  city  in  the  state?  It  is  obvious 
that  in  the  nature  of  things  a  purely  local  policy 
cannot  be  the  subject  of  a  general  law.  The 
mere  effort  to  express  a  policy  suited  to  the 
needs  and  wishes  of  a  particular  locality  in 
the  terms  of  a  law  applicable  everywhere  within 
the  borders  of  the  state  will  convince  any  one  of 
the  force  of  this  statement.  On  the  other  hand, 
such  a  law  cannot  interfere  in  any  way  with  a 
purely  local  concern.  If,  then,  the  state  grant  the 
city  power  to  determine  its  local  public  policy,  no 
further  action  by  the  state  will  be  called  for,  so 
far  as  the  city's  policy-determining  functions  are 
concerned. 

But  the  city,  as  a  local  government,  has  another 
and  most  important  function  to  perform.  Of 
what  avail  is  it  to  the  city  to  decide  policy,  if 
some  outside  authority  controls  its  adminis- 
tration? To  every  government  the  policy-ad- 
ministering power  is  as  vitally  necessary  as  the 
policy-determining  power.  This  is  as  true  of 
local  government  as  of  a  state  or  the  national 
government.  For  that  matter,  there  cannot  be  a 
government  without  its  own  administrative  equip- 
ment to  put  into  effect  the  policy  which  it  decides 
should  control  its  conduct.  The  grant  to  a  city 
of  power  to  decide  its  local  policy  is  an  empty 
form  of  words,  unless  it  be  granted  also  the  power 
to  create  its  own  administrative  organization  to 
enforce  the  policy.  Until  a  city  have  full  author- 
ity both  to  decide  and  to  administer  its  local 


The  City  and  the  State  129 

policy  it  is  not  a  genuine  local  government.  And 
just  as  the  easily  defined  and  easily  observed 
distinction  between  general  state  policy  and 
purely  local  policy  makes  wholly  unnecessary  any 
clash  between  the  policy-determining  functions 
of  state  and  city,  so,  if  a  city  be  permitted  to 
administer  its  own  local  public  policy,  there  can 
be  no  confusion  or  conflict  between  the  policy- 
administering  functions  of  the  two  governments. 
The  jurisdiction  of  the  one  government  is  entirely 
separate  and  distinct  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
other.  The  city  possessed  of  ample  power  to 
perform  all  local  governmental  functions  can 
then  work  out  its  own  destiny  unaided  and  un- 
hindered by  the  state. 

The  city  can  be  a  truly  self-governing  community, 
if  the  state  will  permit  it. 

But  is  there  not  conflict  of  jurisdiction  when  the 
state  declares  a  general  state  policy  in  regard  to 
sanitation,  for  example,  or  the  care  of  the  insane 
or  the  poor  or  the  preservation  of  the  peace,  as  to 
any  of  which  a  city  may  well  have  a  local  policy 
of  its  own?  We  know,  as  a  matter  of  every  day 
experience,  that  these  are  among  the  very  subjects 
with  which  city  government  is  most  intimately 
concerned;  that,  within  its  corporate  limits, 
a  city's  public  policy  as  to  these  matters  is 
often  based  upon  a  higher  standard,  and  the  city's 
administration  of  the  policy  is  often  more  elabo- 
rate in  its  details  and  more  strictly  enforced  than 
is  requisite  in  the  state  at  large  and  may  be  quite 


130    Government  of  American  Cities 

unsuited  to  the  requirements  of  other  cities.  As 
to  such  matters,  it  is  as  much  the  function  of  a 
local  government  as  of  the  central  government 
to  determine  its  public  policy;  but  this  furnishes 
no  sound  reason  for  any  conflict  of  jurisdiction 
between  the  two  governments. 

Let  us  recall  the  distinction  between  a  general 
state  policy  and  a  purely  city  policy.  The  former 
either  applies  throughout  the  entire  state  and 
is  to  be  enforced  everywhere  within  the  state's 
boundaries  or  is  equally  applicable  to  every  city 
within  the  state ;  the  latter  is  applicable  only  with- 
in the  city  concerned.  For  example,  a  general 
state  policy  as  to  education,  or  police,  or  sanita- 
tion applies  as  well  within  as  without  any  par- 
ticular city  and  will  supersede  a  city's  local 
policy  in  such  matters ;  just  as  an  act  of  Congress 
with  reference  to  a  subject  within  its  jurisdiction 
will  supersede  a  state  law  on  the  same  subject — 
but  only  in  so  far  as  the  Congress  declares  a  policy 
applicable  throughout  the  Union.  Further,  the 
state  law  is  superseded  only  to  the  precise  extent 
that  the  Congress  has  spoken.  In  all  other 
respects  the  state  law  remains  in  full  force  and 
effect.  The  distinction  between  the  respective 
jurisdictions  is,  as  has  already  been  pointed  out, 
not  merely  in  the  class  of  subject-matters,  but 
in  the  scope  and  extent  of  the  jurisdiction.  For 
example,  the  building  of  a  bridge  or  the  establish- 
ment of  a  market  is  a  city  function.  The  care  of 
the  public  health  is  both  a  city  and  a  state 


The  City  and  the  State  131 

function.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  duty  to 
preserve  the  peace.  The  state  may  enforce  and 
administer  within  the  city  a  general  state  policy 
as  to  sanitation,  but  is  the  state  not  altogether 
outside  of  its  legitimate  field  when  it  goes  beyond 
this  point  and  interferes  with  the  city's  sanitary 
policy  of  a  higher  grade,  as  to  which  the  state,  as 
central  government,  has  no  general  policy  what- 
ever? The  determination  in  the  case  supposed, 
(of  a  sanitary  policy  of  higher  degree  of  efficiency 
within  the  municipality,)  is  as  purely  an  affair  of 
the  local  government  as  is  the  decision  of  such 
matters  as  street  paving  and  grading,  the  height 
of  buildings,  the  maintenance  of  parks,  the  con- 
struction of  a  bridge,  the  erection  of  a  city  hall, 
the  establishment  of  markets,  the  operation  of 
transit  lines. 

The  state  government,  just  to  the  extent  that  it 
has  a  general  policy  applicable  throughout  the 
state,  or  to  all  the  cities  of  the  state  may  enforce 
that  policy  within  the  corporate  limits.  But  be- 
yond this  point,  or  when  there  is  no  such  gen- 
eral state  policy,  a  city's  local  policy  is  not 
properly  subject  to  state  interference  or  con- 
trol. If,  then,  it  be  asked  how,  on  the  one 
hand,  may  a  city  be  prevented  from  encroaching 
upon  the  state's  domain,  and,  on  the  other,  the 
state  be  kept  from  intruding  into  the  purely 
municipal  field,  or  how  in  any  given  case  shall  the 
line  be  drawn  between  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
state  and  the  jurisdiction  of  a  city,  we  answer, 


132    Government  of  American  Cities 

two  things  are  necessary.  The  first  is  to  clothe 
the  city  once  for  all  with  adequate  power  to  exer- 
cise all  the  functions  of  local  government.  The 
second  is  that,  as  to  those  matters  over  which 
local  government  and  central  government  may 
each  properly  exercise  jurisdiction,  the  state  should 
not  prescribe  or  attempt  to  control  a  city's  policy 
beyond  the  point  required  to  enforce  the  general 
policy  of  the  state. 

One  wholesome  result  of  the  observance  of  these 
principles  would  be  to  diminish  amazingly  the 
bulk  of  our  statute  law  and  to  reduce  even  more 
markedly  the  number  of  proposed  laws  that  con- 
stantly cumber  the  desks  of  our  legislators  to  an  ex- 
tent hardly  credible.  During  the  first  weeks  of  a 
recent  session  of  the  legislature  in  one  of  our  east- 
ern states  more  than  two  hundred  bills  were  intro- 
duced affecting  the  purely  local  affairs  of  one  city. 
An  even  more  wholesome  and  far  more  important 
result  would  be  the  emancipation  of  local  gov- 
ernment from  legislative  intermeddling  with  the 
local  public  policy  of  a  city. 

To  repeat,  the  only  necessary  connection 
between  a  city,  as  local  government,  and  the 
state,  as  central  government,  is  the  grant  of 
sufficient  power  to  the  city  to  exercise  the  func- 
tions of  local  government.  The  state's  necessary 
connection  with  the  city  as  a  local  government 
begins  and  ends  with  the  grant  of  power.  When 
it  is  reco^aed  that  the  true  relation  of  state  to 
city  is  not  one  of  master  to  serf,  it  will  be  much 


The  City  and  the  State  133 

easier  to  secure  both  better  state  and  better  city 
government. 

The  city  as  an  agent  of  the  state  government. 

The  determination  of  policy  by  the  state  govern- 
ment is  futile  without  administrative  agents  to 
enforce  it;  and  the  state  sometimes  uses  the  city 
as  such  an  agent.  The  city,  therefore,  besides  be- 
ing a  local  government,  may  also  be  made  within 
its  corporate  limits  an  agent  of  the  state  govern- 
ment in  the  administration  of  a  general  state 
policy. 1  Whether  or  not  the  state  should  use  a 
city  for  this  purpose  rather  than  some  other 
administrative  agency  will  in  any  given  case  de- 
pend upon  its  circumstances.  It  is  certain  that 
the  power  should  be  exercised  with  extreme 
caution  and  that  it  often  has  been  and  easily  can 
be  put  to  evil  use. 

The  state  is  under  no  compulsion  to  use  a  city ; 
it  may  and  often  does  employ  other  agents  for 
this  purpose.  For  example  the  state  banking, 
insurance,  and  excise  departments  may  adminis- 
ter the  state  laws  on  those  subjects  within  the 
municipal  limits  without  resort  to  any  city 
official. 

The  right  of  the  state  to  enforce  everywhere 
within  its  borders  any  general  state  policy  is 
unquestioned.  Equally  unquestioned  is  its  power 

1  The  use  of  the  city  as  an  agent  is  very  common  in  France 
and  Germany. 


134    Government  of  American  Cities 

to  use  a  city  as  its  agent  for  the  administration 
of  such  a  state  policy  within  the  city's  limits. 
Nor,  as  we  have  shown,  need  there  be  any  conflict 
of  jurisdiction  or  confusion  of  authority  between 
the  central  government  and  a  local  government, 
even  though  the  latter,  as  the  agent  of  the  former, 
be  charged  with  the  administrative  duty  of  enforc- 
ing a  law  which  declares  a  policy  as  to  subjects  in 
regard  to  which  the  city  may  properly  have  a 
local  public  policy  of  its  own, — provided  the  law 
is  made  applicable  equally  and  to  the  same  extent 
everywhere  throughout  the  state  or  to  all  the  cities 
alike.  The  strongest  reasons  of  sound  public  pol- 
icy require  a  strict  observance  of  this  rule. l  That, 
when  the  state  disregards  it,  a  local  government 
is  helpless  makes  the  violation  not  the  less  but 
the  greater  abuse  of  power.  The  evil  results 
of  the  violation  are  among  the  saddest  of  the 
experiences  of  American  cities. 

There  are  two  other  principles  of  a  sound  public 
policy  whose  observance  is  of  an  importance  to 
the  public  welfare  scarcely  to  be  exaggerated. 
Their  constant  violation  has  vastly  complicated 
the  city  problem  in  the  United  States  and  has 
been  a  large  contributory  factor  in  the  misgovern- 
ment  of  both  state  and  city.  The  one  relates  to 
the  supervision  and  control  of  a  city  when  acting  as 
a  subordinate  administrative  agent  of  the  central 
government;  the  other  is  the  public  impolicy  of 
using  elected  city  officials  to  enforce  a  state  law 

»  This  is  why  the  European  system  succeeds. 


The  City  and  the  State  135 

which  runs  counter  to  a  strong  local  sentiment  in 
the  city  concerned. 

It  is  elementary  that  the  agent  is  accountable  to 
the  principal  for  his  conduct  within  the  scope  of 
his  agency ;  and,  when  a  city  is  made  a  subordinate 
administrative  agent  of  the  state,  it  is  entirely 
proper  that  the  state  should  hold  it  accountable 
for  its  conduct  as  such  agent.  But  the  account- 
ability should  be  enforced  by  the  appropriate 
administrative  department  of  the  state,  never  by 
the  state  legislature.  To  illustrate,  the  state 
department  of  finance  should  supervise  a  city's 
collection  of  state  taxes,  the  state  health  depart- 
ment should  control  a  city's  enforcement  of  the 
state  sanitary  policy,  the  state  department  of 
education  the  city's  administration  of  the  state 
educational  standard  within  its  corporate  limits. 

The  state  legislature  is  intended  to  perform 
deliberative  functions,  to  control  matters  of 
taxation  and  appropriation;  to  determine  ques- 
tions of  general  state  policy ;  to  embody  that  policy 
in  general  laws;  to  create,  if  need  be,  state  ad- 
ministrative offices  or  departments.  All  these  are 
properly  legislative  functions ;  but  administration, 
as  such,  is  not  a  proper  legislative  function.  A 
legislature  is  not  an  administrative  body.  It 
is  neither  equipped  nor  intended  to  perform 
administrative  functions.  The  legislature  may 
properly  enact  laws  establishing  the  state  policy 
in  regard  to  education,  for  instance,  or  the  public 
health,  or  the  custody  of  criminals;  but  the  ad- 


136    Government  of  American- Cities 

ministrative  service  of  the  state  should  be  left  to 
enforce  the  laws  as  to  education,  public  health, 
and  prisons,  and  the  chiefs  of  state  administrative 
departments,  not  the  legislature,  should  supervise 
the  state's  administrative  service.  Our  legisla- 
tures have  wrought  infinite  mischief  by  intrusion 
into  the  purely  administrative  field.  Nine- tenths 
of  the  contents  of  the  statute  books  are  made  up  of 
details  of  procedure,  of  minutiae  of  administration. 
And,  since  a  statutory  regulation,  no  matter  how 
unfit,  can  only  be  altered  by  another  statutory 
regulation,  the  desks  of  members  of  the  legislature 
groan  at  every  session  under  a  stupendous  weight 
of  desired  and  often  necessary  amendments  to  the 
already  exaggerated  bulk  of  laws  that  owe  their 
origin  to  this  form  of  misdirected  legislative 
activity.  That  legislative  functions  are  not  ad- 
ministrative functions  and  that  legislative  activity 
ought  in  the  public  interest  to  be  excluded  from 
the  administrative  field  is  a  fundamental  principle 
of  good  government  national,  state,  and  municipal. 
The  observance  of  this  rule  is  of  especial  impor- 
tance in  the  treatment  of  city  government  by  the 
state  legislature,  for  city  government  more  than 
any  other  is  concerned  with  matters  of  adminis- 
tration. Its  functions  when  it  acts  as  the  agent 
of  the  state  for  the  enforcement  of  general  laws, 
within  the  corporate  limits,  are  purely  adminis- 
trative; and  it  is  charged  besides  with  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  multifarious  details  of  its 
own  local  business.  In  the  very  nature  of  things 


The  City  and  the  State  137 

its  administrative  service  must  often  exceed  many 
fold  that  of  the  state  both  in  number  of  persons 
employed,  in  the  expenditure  involved,  and  in  the 
multitude,  the  magnitude,  and  the  intricacy  of  its 
problems.  The  evil  effects,  therefore,  of  the  in- 
trusion of  the  state  legislature  into  the  adminis- 
trative field  are  especially  felt  in  the  case  of  cities. 
These  evils  are  still  further  aggravated  by  the 
fact  that  the  legislature  is  the  policy-determining 
branch  of  the  state  government.  The  decision 
of  questions  of  policy  gives  rise  to  political  parties. 
Not  only  is  it  true,  therefore,  that  whenever  the 
legislature  enters  the  field  of  administration  its 
intrinsic  unfitness  for  such  work  results  in  costly 
inefficiency — as,  for  example,  when  it  attempts  to 
regulate  the  detailed  rules  of  court  procedure — but 
such  legislative  intermeddling  injects  partisan 
politics  into  the  place  of  all  others  most  unfit  for 
political  partisanship — the  public  administrative 
service. 

This  has  found  abundant  illustration  in  the  long 
history  of  municipal  misgovernment  in  the  United 
States.  Persistent  legislative  interference  with 
the  details  of  purely  local  administration  has 
confused  and  complicated  the  municipal  problem 
from  the  beginning. 

Whether  the  general  state  law  which  the  city  is 
called  upon  to  administer  within  its  corporate 
limits  be  one  in  regard  to  a  matter  in  which  a 
local  government  has  properly  no  concern  (such 


138    Government  of  American  Cities 

as  the  collection  of  state  taxes) ,  or  be  one  in  regard 
to  the  public  health  (for  example,  as  to  which  the 
city  may  have  a  vital  interest  in  enforcing  a  far 
higher  sanitary  standard  than  observance  of  the 
state  law  would  require) ,  it  should  always  be  held 
clearly  in  mind  that  the  city  has  no  more  lot  or 
share  in  determining  the  policy  of  the  state  law  in 
the  one  case  than  in  the  other.  It  is  simply  the 
subordinate  administrative  agent  of  the  state  to 
enforce  the  law,  and  whether  the  policy  of  the 
same  be  good  or  bad,  wise  or  unwise,  the  state 
is  responsible,  not  the  city. 

Now,  essential  as  it  is  to  the  successful  conduct 
of  any  private  business  that  no  person  shall  remain 
in  its  employ  one  instant,  if  his  views  as  to  the 
policy  of  the  business  interfere  with  the  faithful 
performance  of  his  duties,  this  is  still  more  essential 
to  the  successful  conduct  of  public  business.  To 
employ  an  agent  to  enforce  a  policy  which  he 
actively  opposes  is  to  defeat  the  very  purpose  of  his 
employment  and  in  private  life  is  sure  proof  either 
of  stupidity  on  the  part  of  the  employer,  or  that 
he  does  not  want  his  policy  enforced.  The  same 
can  be  said  with  equal  truth  and  with  much  more 
emphasis  when  the  state  is  the  principal  and 
makes  a  city  its  agent  to  enforce  a  general  state 
law,  knowing  that,  if  the  elected  officials  of  the 
city  enforce  the  law,  they  must  pursue  a  course 
contrary  to  the  views  strongly  held  by  a  large 
proportion  of  the  citizens  of  the  city. 

Every  principle  of  sound  public  policy  forbids 


The  City  and  the  State  139 

any  attempt  to  enforce  such  a  law  through  locally 
elected  officials.  These  local  officials  owe  their 
election  to  the  belief  that  they  will  represent  the 
views  of  the  local  voters.  The  state,  nevertheless, 
constitutes  them  state  officials  to  enforce  a  state 
law  that  runs  counter  to  the  local  sentiment. 
The  unwisdom  of  placing  them  in  such  an  incon- 
sistent position  is  manifest  from  the  point  of  view 
both  of  state  and  city.  On  the  one  hand,  it 
introduces  the  vicious  practice  of  defeating  the 
declared  policy  of  the  state  by  permitting  the 
administration  of  the  policy  to  be  actively  hostile 
to  its  enforcement;  for  experience  shows  that  the 
city's  voters  hostile  to  the  state  policy  endeavor 
to  elect  local  officials  who  will  not  enforce  it.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  enforcement  of  the  purely  local 
public  policy,  instead  of  being  in  the  hands  of  city 
officials  elected  on  local  issues,  is  committed  to 
persons  whose  election  was  due  to  the  local  senti- 
ment as  to  a  state  policy.  We  have  had  many 
flagrant  examples  of  the  pernicious  effects  of  such 
a  course  upon  both  the  local  policy  and  the  local 
administration  of  the  city.  It  demoralizes  the 
conduct  of  the  local  government,  injects  into  ad- 
ministration, partisan  politics  in  its  worst  form 
and  the  daily  defiance  of  the  law  by  elected  city 
officials  with  the  approval  of  their  constituents 
breeds  civic  degeneracy. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE  RELATION  OF  THE  CITY  TO  ITS  CITIZENS 

THOUGH,  the  only  necessary  connection  be- 
tween a  city,  as  local  government,  and  the 
state,  as  central  government,  begins  and  ends  with 
the  grant  by  the  state  to  the  city  of  the  right  to 
exist  and  the  power  to  act,  the  connection  between 
a  city,  as  local  government,  and  the  dwellers 
within  its  borders  is  of  the  closest  and  most 
intimate  sort. 

When  a  considerable  population  is  concen- 
trated within  a  limited  area,  not  only  is  there  far 
more  frequent  occasion  for  the  exercise  of  all 
the  functions  of  government  within  the  locality 
than  in  a  sparsely  settled  region  but  the  need  for 
such  exercise  is  far  more  imperative.  It  has  been 
the  invariable  experience  that  the  more  closely 
compacted  the  population,  and  the  more  highly  de- 
veloped its  industrial  organization,  the  more  insist- 
ent, the  more  frequent,  and  the  more  extensive  are 
the  local  demands  for  governmental  activity  in  the 
public  interest.  The  determination  of  the  policy 
which  shall  control  the  conduct  of  the  local  public 
affairs,  the  organization  of  the  administrative 

140 


The  City  and  its  Citizens         141 

equipment  to  carry  out  the  local  public  policy, 
and  the  establishment  of  appropriate  means  to 
enforce  governmental  authority  within  the  locality 
bring  into  constant  use  the  legislative,  executive, 
administrative,  and  judicial  functions  of  govern- 
ment. In  the  very  nature  of  the  case  some 
government  must  exercise  these  functions.  What 
government,  then,  shall  it  be?  Shall  the  city  be 
regarded  as  a  subject  province  or  dependency 
whose  public  affairs  shall  be  controlled  by  the 
state  government,  or  as  a  self-governing  commu- 
nity, entitled  within  its  local  sphere  to  perform  all 
the  governmental  functions  which  the  local  public 
interests  require? 

We  are  not  left  to  abstract  or  a  priori  reasoning 
for  answers  to  these  questions.  It  would  seem 
as  if  every  possible  method  of  city  government 
had  been  tried  in  the  United  States  until  within 
recent  years,  except  the  one  which  for  three 
quarters  of  a  century  in  England  has  proved  it- 
self admirably  adapted  to  the  needs  of  a  people 
whose  political  beliefs  and  aspirations  are  demo- 
cratic and  who  during  their  whole  history  have 
been  endeavoring  through  the  application  of  the 
representative  principle  to  have  a  government 
expressive  of  their  will.  If  we  are  capable  of 
being  convinced  by  experience,  we  shall  never 
expect  anything  but  failure  from  any  effort  to 
satisfy  the  governmental  needs  of  our  cities 
through  the  method  of  city  subjection  to  some 
external  authority.  The  attempt  by  outside, 


142    Government  of  American  Cities 

superimposed  authority  to  direct  and  control  the 
public  affairs  of  our  cities,  to  determine  for  them 
their  local  public  policy  and  administrative 
methods,  has  made  an  unvarying  record  of  failure. 

The  municipal  experience  of  Ohio  will  serve  as 
an  example.  Ohio  is  selected  not  because  the 
attempt  to  solve  the  problem  of  city  government 
by  the  application  of  external  authority  resulted 
in  a  worse  failure  there  than  in  other  states — it 
has  been  a  failure  in  every  state — but  because  her 
experience  admirably  illustrates  that,  to  meet  the 
ever  varying  circumstances  and  constantly  grow- 
ing needs  of  a  city,  there  is  no  halting-place 
between  superimposed  government  and  self-gov- 
ernment. Ohio's  experience  may  also  be  profit*- 
ably  compared  with  that  of  Illinois  to  which  we 
have  already  called  attention.  * 

In  1870,  when  the  Illinois  constitution  was 
adopted,  there  had  begun  to  be  some  appreciation 
of  the  need  of  granting  to  cities  at  least  some 
power  of  self-government,  as  well  as  of  protecting 
them  against  the  evils  of  special  legislation;  and 
in  the  Illinois  general  municipal  corporation  act 
of  1872,  which  was  to  become  effective  in  any  city 
that  adopted  it  by  popular  vote,  a  considerable 
measure  of  power  to  control  their  own  local 
public  affairs  was  granted  to  cities.  Ohio's 
constitution  was  adopted  nineteen  years  earlier, 
in  18,51.  At  that  time  it  is  not  probable  that 
many  persons  actively  engaged  in  political  life 

i  Chap,  vii.,  pp.  87-91,  supra. 


The  City  and  its  Citizens         143 

in  the  United  States  had  even  begun  to  think  of 
a  city  as  a  self-governing  community.  A  city 
was  merely  a  subordinate  civil  division  of  the 
state,  a  part  of  the  state's  physical  area  somewhat 
more  densely  populated  than  other  portions. 
That  a  city  was  entitled  to  be  a  self-governing 
community  competent  to  supply  its  own  local 
governmental  needs  was  an  idea  scarcely,  if  at  all, 
present  in  men's  minds.  Already,  however,  in  185 1 
the  evils  of  special  legislation  had  become  apparent 
and  the  framers  of  the  Ohio  constitution  en- 
deavored to  check  the  growing  practice  of  special 
legislation  by  requiring  all  laws  of  a  general 
nature  to  have  a  uniform  operation  throughout 
the  state, 1  by  forbidding  any  special  act  conferring 
corporate  power2  and  by  providing  for  the  or- 
ganization of  cities  by  general  laws  and  restricting 
their  power  of  taxation,  assessment,  borrowing 
money,  contracting  debts  and  loaning  their  credit 
"so  as  to  prevent  the  abuse  of  such  power. "3 

In  1852  the  Ohio  legislature  enacted  a  general 
municipal  corporations  act  which  divided  cities 
into  two  classes,  those  of  the  first  class  with  a 
population  of  more  than  20,000,  of  the  second 
class  with  a  population  of  from  5,000  to  20,000. 
The  powers  of  self-government  conferred  were 
much  inferior  to  those  in  the  later  Illinois  act. 

Soon  the  cities  of  Ohio  began  to  increase  in 
number  and  in  population  and  to  differ  among 

»  Art.  I.,  Sec.  26.  2  Art.  XIII.,  Sec.  i. 

s  Art.  XIII.,  Sec.  6. 


144   Government  of  American  Cities 

themselves  in  respect  to  their  governmental  needs. 
The  constitution  forbade  special  laws  affecting  a 
particular  city,  yet  the  needs  of  a  particular  city 
frequently  demanded  special  treatment.  What 
was  to  be  done  ?  The  legislature  might  by  amend- 
ments to  the  general  municipal  corporations  act 
have  granted  the  powers  which  would  enable  any 
city  to  meet  just  such  emergencies,  but  this 
method  did  not  occur  to  it.  On  the  contrary, 
extreme  ingenuity  was  used  in  devising  laws 
general  in  form  but  special  in  purpose.  It  is 
altogether  probable  that  in  the  beginning  there 
seemed  no  other  way  to  meet  the  varying  condi- 
tions and  circumstances  peculiar  to  this  and  that 
individual  city.  In  the  constitutional  convention 
it  had  apparently  been  taken  for  granted  that  a 
law  affecting  all  cities  of  a  certain  class  was  a 
general  law  within  the  meaning  of  the  constitution 
and  there  was  no  express  limitation  to  the  power  to 
create  classes.  The  legislative  method,  accord- 
ingly, was  to  create  a  new  class  of  which  at  the 
time  there  was  only  one  member  and  to  enact 
a  general  law  as  to  that  class.  The  court  sus- 
tained this  interpretation  of  the  constitution. 
And  as  cities  grew  in  number  the  classification 
of  cities  multiplied. 

By  the  year  1902  there  was  scarcely  a  city  of 
any  considerable  size  in  Ohio  which  did  not  have 
a  charter  general  in  form  and  theoretically  ap- 
plicable to  any  other  city  that  came  within 
the  prescribed  limits  of  population  defining 


The  City  and  its  Citizens         145 

the  particular  " constitutional  class"  to  which 
the  charter  applied.  In  fact,  the  city  had  a 
special  charter  which  the  state  legislature  had 
devised  for  that  particular  city.  There  were 
also  innumerable  " general  laws"  which  had 
been  passed  from  time  to  time  to  amend  and 
perfect  the  general  law  which  gave  the  city  its 
special  charter,  or  which  affected  in  this,  that,  or 
the  other  respect  the  local  affairs  of  all  cities  of  a 
particular  class,  that  is  to  say  of  one  particular 
city. 

The  reductio  ad  absurdum  of  this  judicial  inter- 
pretation of  the  constitution  finally  became  so 
glaring  that,  in  1902,  the  Supreme  Court  of  Ohio 
felt  compelled  to  overrule  the  long  line  of  prece- 
dents its  previous  decisions  had  established  and 
rendered  a  series  of  decisions  which  left  scarcely 
a  city  with  a  valid  government  when  tested  by 
the  court's  new  interpretation  of  the  constitutional 
provisions  adopted  fifty  years  before.  So  revolu- 
tionary was  this  new  attitude  of  the  court  that  it 
suspended  execution  in  order  to  give  the  other 
departments  of  the  government  "opportunity  to 
take  action  as  to  them  may  seem  best  in  view 
of  the  condition  which  the  execution  of  our  judg- 
ment will  create. " 

The  lesson  of  Ohio's  experience,  like  that  of  the 
contrasting  experience  in  Illinois,  is  a  very  plain 
one.  For  fifty  years  the  state-government  of 
cities  was  as  thoroughly  tried  in  Ohio  as  human 
ingenuity  and  diligence  could  accomplish  and 


146    Government  of  American  Cities 

under  the  most  favorable  circumstances.  There 
were  very  few  cities  in  1852  when  the  first  muni- 
cipal corporations  act  was  passed,  and  Cincinnati 
was  the  only  city  having  a  population  over  20,000. 
In  character  they  were  towns  rather  than  cities; 
their  needs  were  simple  and  comparatively  few 
and  there  was  abundant  opportunity  to  learn  by 
experience  as  time  went  on.  If  ever  there  had 
been  any  hope  that  in  practical  operation  the 
state-governing  method  would  succeed,  or  any 
possible  combination  of  that  method  with  various 
degrees  and  kinds  of  partial  local  self-government, 
the  utter  failure  of  so  highly  intelligent  and  pro- 
gressive a  state  as  Ohio  would  have  extinguished 
that  hope  among  observers  of  comparative  pro- 
gress in  city  government.  How  different  would 
have  been  the  story  of  Cincinnati,  for  example,  if 
it  had  possessed  even  such  measure  of  self-govern- 
ment as  was  given  Chicago  by  the  Illinois  corpo- 
ration act  and  the  courts  of  Ohio  had  interpreted 
the  state  constitution  in  1852  as  they  did  in  1902. 
Ohio's  experience  is  not  peculiar.  The  futility  of 
any  effort  to  conduct  a  city's  public  affairs  without 
granting  to  it  adequate  authority  as  a  local  gov- 
ernment has  been  demonstrated  again  and  again. 
Nor  is  it  any  argument  against  the  fundamental 
soundness  of  this  principle  that  its  full  acceptance 
requires  that  the  city  should  have  a  local  legisla- 
ture clothed  with  complete  local  legislative  power. 
It  is  true  that  city  councils  and  boards  of  alder- 
men have  so  conducted  themselves  in  the  past 


The  City  and  its  Citizens         147 

that  they  have  been  deprived,  with  popular  ap- 
proval, of  most  of  such  legislative  powers  as  they 
possessed.  But  the  ill-repute  of  legislative  bodies 
is  not  confined  to  our  city  councils  and  boards  of 
aldermen.  It  extends  to  the  state  legislatures  as 
well.  How  else  shall  we  explain  that  each  new 
state  constitution  contains  additional  safeguards 
against  legislative  action?  The  growing  popular- 
ity of  the  initiative,  the  referendum,  and  the  recall 
is  another  symptom  of  the  distrust  of  the  legislative 
branch  of  our  government. 

The  disrepute  into  which  the  legislative  branch 
of  our  state  and  city  governments  has  fallen  has 
not  made  legislation  less  indispensable  for  the 
conduct  of  either  government.  Neither  has  the 
reduction  of  city  councils  and  aldermen  to  mere 
simulacra  of  local  legislatures  diminished  the 
volume  of  local  legislation. 

The  local  legislative  function  has  been  shared  in 
various  ways  between  the  state  legislature  and 
locally  appointed  or  elected  officials  and  boards, 
the  state  legislature  itself  has  been  made  the  chief 
source  and  dispenser  of  legislation  for  the  city, 
there  have  been  innumerable  experiments ;  not  one 
of  them  has  relieved  the  city  of  the  need  of  local 
legislation,  not  one  of  them  has  successfully 
supplied  that  need.  A  bulky  volume  could  be 
written  illustrating  the  futility  of  the  attempt 
to  conduct  city  government  without  a  local 
legislative  body,  and  showing  the  confusion  and 
irresponsibility  caused  by  the  distribution  of  local 


1 48   Government  of  American  Cities 

legislative  authority  among  different  appointive 
and  elective  officials  and  boards.  Contrast  in  this 
respect  any  English  city  with  the  city  of  New 
York.  The  sanitary,  police,  building,  street 
traffic,  and  other  local  laws  and  regulations  are 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  council  of  an  English 
city.  Who  will  venture  to  say  what  or  which 
department  or  combination  of  departments  of 
the  city  of  New  York  has  had  authority  to  legislate 
in  such  matters?  There  has  been  a  chaos  of  local 
ordinances  whose  violation  may  make  an  unin- 
tentional and  unwilling  misdemeanant  of  any 
citizen. 

It  is  time  that,  instead  of  curtailing  state  legis- 
latures of  power  by  constitutional  provisions  or 
weakening  more  and  more  the  local  legislatures 
of  our  cities,  we  frankly  recognized  the  true  cause 
of  the  demoralization  and  disrepute  of  the  legis- 
lative branch  of  our  government  and  that  we 
began  to  apply  a  real  remedy. 

The  popular  distrust  of  our  legislatures  is  due  to 
the  fact  that  their  members  do  not  represent  the 
popular  will,  and,  on  the  contrary,  exercise  their 
great  powers  in  many  ways  that  the  people  posi- 
tively disapprove.  The  remedy  consists  in  finding 
some  way  to  make  the  legislatures,  national,  state, 
and  local,  representative  of  the  public  policies 
which  their  constituents  desire  to  have  put  into 
effective  operation.  In  the  field  of  local  govern- 
ment the  application  of  this  remedy  depends  -first 
upon  clothing  the  local  legislature  with  ample 


The  City  and  its  Citizens         149 

power  and  then  leaving  the  people  of  the  locality 
to  deal  with  the  members  of  the  legislature — 
witness  the  experience  of  Chicago;  and,  secondly, 
upon  adopting  electoral  methods  which  will  insure 
that  the  people  of  the  locality  control  the  selection 
and  election  of  candidates  for  the  local  legislature. 
Such  a  legislature  will  be  an  assembly  truly 
representative  of  the  local  will  as  to  the  policies 
which  the  city's  voters  desire  to  control  in  the 
conduct  of  the  city's  public  affairs.  The  real 
trouble  is  not  that  there  is  not  abundant  need  of 
local  legislation,  nor  that  representative  govern- 
ment has  broken  down,  but  that  government, 
instead  of  representing  the  people,  is  responsible 
and  therefore  responsive  to  interests  not  in  sym- 
pathy with  the  people.  Since,  therefore,  local 
legislation  is  a  vital  necessity,  and  the  transference 
from  city  to  state  legislatures  of  the  duty  of 
providing  the  local  legislation  needed  has  in- 
variably resulted  in  city  misgovernment,  we  should 
recognize  not  only  that  the  courageous  and  intel- 
ligent application  of  the  representative  principle  in 
local  government  is  the  method  which  will  solve 
our  difficulties,  but  that  there  is  no  alternative. 

Every  city  needs  local  legislation  enacted  by  a 
local  body  clothed  with  ample  legislative  authority 
and  locally  elected  by  methods  which  make  its 
members  responsible  and  responsive  to  the  local 
electorate. 

What  has  been  said  with  regard  to  the  necessity 


150    Government  of  American  Cities 

of  clothing  the  city  with  local  legislative  power 
applies  with  equal  force  to  its  need  of  authority 
to  exercise  judicial  functions.  The  exercise  of 
judicial  functions  is  as  essential  an  attribute  of 
government  as  to  make  or  administer  laws.  A 
city,  therefore,  if  it  be  a  genuine  local  government, 
will  have  authority  to  establish  courts  with  civil 
and  criminal  jurisdiction  as  to  matters  of  purely 
local  concern  under  the  laws  enacted  by  the  local 
legislature.  If  it  be  necessary  to  resort  to  the 
courts  of  some  other  government  to  enforce  the 
provisions  of  a  purely  local  law,  the  command 
of  the  law  will  depend  for  its  sanction  not  upon  the 
local  but  an  external  authority.  A  community 
is  not  self-governing  if  it  has  not  authority  to 
enforce  its  laws. 


The  conception  of  a  city  as  a  mere  civil  division 
of  the  state,  to  be  governed  like  a  subject  province 
by  external  authority,  or,  as  without  more  def- 
inite status  in  our  political  system  than  the 
changing  moods  of  a  state  legislature  may  give  for 
the  time  being,  must  be  altogether  discarded,  not 
merely  because  it  is  unsound  in  principle,  nor 
simply  because  it  has  failed  to  give  good  city 
government,  but  because  it  has  been  the  prolific 
source  of  every  variety  of  bad  city  government. 
In  its  stead,  we  must  put  an  altogether  different 
conception,  that  of  the  city  as  a  local  government ; 
and  we  must  transmute  this  conception  into  a 
vital,  living  reality.  The  city  must  be  made  a 


The  City  and  its  Citizens         151 

genuine  government  equipped,  as  far  as  the  local 
needs  are  concerned,  with  every  appropriate 
governmental  power.  We  must  appreciate  that, 
to  the  extent  that  a  city  is  not  so  equipped,  it 
falls  short  of  being  a  government  at  all  and  that 
the  demoralizing  intrusion  of  outside  authority 
into  the  local  field  is  made  compulsory ;  that  there 
is  not  a  single  governmental  function  whose  exer- 
cise the  adequate  satisfaction  of  the  local  needs  of 
the  city  does  not  make  imperative.  The  city  must 
be  recognized  as  entitled  to  be  a  self-governing 
community,  with  power  to  decide  all  questions  of 
local  public  policy,  power  to  administer  that 
policy,  and  power  to  enforce  its  authority  as  a 
local  government ;  for  these  are  the  essential 
attributes  of  government.  This  means  that  local 
legislation  should  be  enacted  by  a  legislative  body 
directly  accountable  to  a  local  electorate  and  that 
the  questions  with  which  the  local  legislature  is 
concerned  should  be  limited  only  by  the  needs  of 
the  community-life  which  the  city  calls  into 
being.  It  means  also  that  those  charged  with  the 
execution  and  enforcement  of  the  local  policy 
should  be  directly  accountable  to  the  local  elector- 
ate. The  purely  administrative  functions  of  the 
local  government,  however,  and  the  performance 
of  its  judicial  functions,  such  as  the  imposition  of 
penalties  or  other  punishments  for  violation  of  its 
local  laws,  should  be  recognized  as  entirely  non- 
political  matters.  The  members  of  the  city's  ju- 
diciary and  its  administrative  service  should  be 


i$2    Government  of  American  Cities 

selected  and  retained  in  their  positions  without 
reference  to  their  views  on  local  or  other  issues 
that  divide  men  into  opposing  political  parties. 
To  sum  up :  The  true  relation  of  a  city  to  its  citi- 
zens is  that  of  a  government,  a  local  government 
to  be  sure,  but  nevertheless  a  real  government; 
and,  as  such,  it  should  be  clothed  with  every  essen- 
tial governmental  power  and  amply  equipped  with 
the  means  to  perform  every  appropriate  govern- 
mental function  within  its  purely  local  field. 
But  it  must  be  a  government  responsible  to  the 
local  electorate.  The  citizens  of  the  city,  the 
governed,  must  have  full  opportunity  to  enforce 
accountability  for  the  conduct  of  their  local  govern- 
ment. This  is  democracy,  the  rule  of  the  people, 
through  the  intelligent  application  of  the  repre- 
sentative principle. 


CHAPTER  XI 

PRE-REQUISITES     TO     THE     SELF-GOVERNMENT     OF 
CITIES 

WE  are  now  in  a  position  to  enumerate  some 
of  the  essential  principles  to  be  observed 
in  order  to  have  good  city  government  in  the 
United  States. 

I 

THE    CITY   AS    LOCAL   GOVERNMENT 

i .  A  city  is  not  a  province  to  be  administered  by 
some  outside  authority,  but  a  government. 

Before  there  can  be  any  successful  solution  of  the 
city  problem  it  is  necessary  to  regard  it  from  the 
right  point  of  view.  It  is  self-evident  that  when 
a  considerable  population  is  massed  within  a 
limited  area,  a  community  life  is  developed  whose 
needs  and  circumstances  are  very  different  both 
in  degree  and  in  kind  from  those  of  the  isolated 
individual  lives  of  dwellers  in  agricultural  or 
grazing  regions.  Who  shall  supply  the  new 
methods  and  enforce  the  new  regulations  which 
these  changed  conditions  make  inevitable?  Shall 

153 


154    Government  of  American  Cities 

the  community  supply  them  or  shall  some  outside 
authority  undertake  the  task?  In  other  words, 
shall  the  central  government,  the  state,  control 
the  development  of  the  community  life  or  shall  the 
community  meet  its  own  needs?  The  ultimate 
authority  is  in  the  state,  and  the  community  can 
act  in  the  matter  only  to  the  extent  to  which  the 
state  permits.  It  goes  without  saying  that  the 
state  can,  if  it  so  chooses,  grant  to  the  community 
no  power  of  self-government  whatever.  If  this 
be  the  course  pursued,  the  community  is  evidently 
governed  as  a  subject  province,  the  state  deciding 
what  is  best  for  it.  It  is,  however,  not  always  so 
clearly  recognized  that  the  community  is  treated 
as  a  subject  province  when  the  state  apparently 
grants  a  governmental  power  but  withholds  the 
right  freely  to  exercise  the  power,  either  by  not 
giving  the  city  any  means  of  deciding  how  the 
power  is  to  be  exercised  or  by  not  permitting 
the  city  to  provide  its  own  means  for  enforcing 
the  policy  it  adopts. 

Suppose,  for  example,  the  state  grants  to  the 
community  the  right  to  build  a  bridge,  but  no 
authority  to  regulate  its  use ;  or  to  lay  out  streets, 
but  no  authority  to  regulate  the  traffic  through 
the  streets ;  or  to  acquire  or  establish  a  lighting 
plant,  but  no  authority  to  administer  the  plant ; 
the  state  reserving  to  itself  the  right  of  deciding 
or  accompanying  the  grant  of  power  with  the 
prescription  on  its  own  part  of  the  policy  according 
to  which  bridges  shall  be  built,  streets  laid  out, 


Pre-requisites  to  Self-Government    155 

lighting  plants  acquired ;  or,  while  permitting  the 
city  to  decide  for  itself  whether  it  shall  have 
bridges  or  streets  or  lighting  plants,  prescribes 
the  details  according  to  which  they  shall  be  ad- 
ministered. Such  a  grant  of  power  by  the  state 
is  a  mere  sham. 

The  first  necessary  step  toward  the  solution  of 
the  city  problem  in  the  United  States  is  to  recog- 
nize that  it  is  a  governmental  problem,  and  that, 
therefore,  its  solution  is  not  really  begun  until  a 
city  has  the  authority  to  decide  for  itself  the  policy 
according  to  which  any  power  granted  it,  how- 
ever insignificant  or  however  restricted  its  field 
of  operation,  shall  be  exercised,  and  to  organize  its 
own  methods  for  enforcing  the  policy. 

2.  A  city  should  have  all  the  powers  requisite  to 
satisfy  the  local  needs  of  the  community  within  its 
corporate  limits. 

If  the  first  step  toward  the  solution  of  the  city 
problem  is  the  recognition  that  the  city  is  a 
genuine  government,  the  next  is  to  clothe  it  with 
ample  governmental  authority  to  satisfy  the  local 
needs  of  the  community  within  its  corporate 
limits.  The  satisfaction  of  these  needs  is  the 
primary  function  of  a  city,  the  fundamental 
reason  for  its  existence  as  a  local  government. 
If  once  a  city  be  granted  really  adequate  power  to 
satisfy  these  local  needs,  application  to  the  state 
legislature  for  the  grant  of  additional  local  govern- 
mental powers  will  be  unnecessary;  and  if,  in 


156    Government  of  American  Cities 

accordance  with  the  first  principle  above  enun- 
ciated, the  city  be  permitted  to  determine  for 
itself  the  local  policy  and  to  devise  its  own  methods 
and  adopt  its  own  agencies  for  the  enforcement  of 
its  policy,— if,  in  brief,  it  be  a  complete  local 
government,  the  state  legislature  will  have  neither 
occasion  nor  excuse  for  interfering  with  the 
substance  or  detail  of  the  local  administration. 
This  eliminates  interference  by  the  state  legisla- 
ture with  the  city  problem,  so  far  as  a  city  is 
concerned  with  local  needs,  and  makes  the  city 
a  self-governing  community  instead  of  a  subject 
dependency. 

3.  Within  its  corporate  limits  a  city  should 
be  invested  with  all  the  powers  of  government  not 
inconsistent  with  the  state  constitution  or  general 
state  laws. 

This  simply  carries  into  effect  the  principles 
already  stated  and  furnishes  a  practical  method, 
not  only  of  avoiding  any  conflict  of  jurisdiction 
between  the  state  as  central  government  and  a 
city  as  local  government,  but  of  preserving  the 
superior  authority  of  the  state  in  all  matters 
properly  within  the  latter's  jurisdiction.  For 
a  general  state  law,  if  it  be  defined  as  one  equally 
applicable  either  to  every  portion  of  the  state 
or  to  every  city  in  the  state,  is  not  intended  to 
satisfy  the  peculiar  needs  of  a  particular  locality. 
Thus  a  city  instead  of  possessing  only  enumer- 
ated powers  would  be  presumed  to  have  all 


Pre-requisites  to  Self-Government    157 

the  powers  requisite  to  perform  the  functions 
of  government  within  its  appropriate  field  and 
something  in  the  state  constitution  or  in  a  gen- 
eral state  law  would  have  to  be  found  in  order 
to  overcome  this  presumption.  This  would 
introduce  precisely  the  opposite  legal  rule  of 
interpretation  in  the  case  of  a  city  to  the  one  now 
in  force  as  to  corporations  generally — a  very 
wholesome  change  in  the  law,  if  a  city  is  to  be  a 
genuine  local  government. 

4.  The  qualified  voters  of  a  city  subject  to  the 
state  constitution  and  to  general  laws  applicable 
to  all  the  cities  of  the  state  (and,  as  a  consequence, 
not  liable  to  alteration  or  amendment  at  the  caprice 
of  the  state  legislature)  should  be  free  to  make  and 
to  amend  their  own  form  of  local  government. 

This  is  a  logical  corollary  of  the  doctrine  of 
genuine  local  self-government.  No  one  can  be- 
come so  well  qualified  by  experience  as  the  citizens 
of  a  city  to  know  what  form  of  government  will 
be  most  likely  to  express  satisfactorily  the  wishes 
and  meet  the  peculiar  needs  of  the  locality.  The 
form  of  city  government  best  adapted  to  the 
exigencies  of  the  local  situation  must  be  expected 
to  vary  with  the  special  circumstances  of  each 
city,  and  so  long  as  the  fundamental  principles 
of  the  state  constitution  are  observed  and  the 
general  laws  of  the  state  are  respected,  why  should 
not  the  citizens  of  any  given  city  be  free  to  devise 
the  framework  of  its  government?  It  is  generally 


158    Government  of  American  Cities 

recognized  now  as  entirely  proper  that  different 
cities  should  have  different  governmental  plans, 
and  for  half  a  century  our  state  legislatures  of 
their  own  motion,  or  at  the  suggestion  of  some  one 
in  the  locality,  have  been  devising  special  plans 
of  government  for  this  city  and  that.  New 
York's  charter  would  be  a  misfit  for  Binghamton, 
the  charter  of  Pittsburg  would  not  suit  Wilkes- 
barre.  What  sound  principle  of  public  policy 
would  be  violated,  if  each  of  these  cities  were  left 
free  to  devise  its  own  structural  plan  of  govern- 
ment? The  progressive  improvement  in  the 
form  of  city  government  in  the  states  in  which 
cities  to  some  extent  have  this  power  is  a  practical 
demonstration  of  the  value  of  the  principle  here 
advocated. 

5.  The  merit  principle  should  be  applied 
throughout  the  purely  administrative  public  service 
of  the  city. 

There  is  no  division  of  opinion  as  to  the  need  of 
honesty  and  efficiency  in  public  office.  It  is  im- 
possible to  create  political  parties  on  such  questions 
as  the  proper  method  of  building  a  bridge,  collecting 
the  city's  taxes,  enforcing  the  building  regulations, 
or  a  myriad  other  matters  of  a  purely  administra- 
tive character.  An  official  whose  duties  involve 
in  their  performance  no  issue  which  divides  men 
•  -  of  different  opinions  into  political  parties  is  a 
non-partisan,  non-political  official  and  should 
obtain  and  keep  his  position  because  of  honesty 


Pre-requisites  to  Self-Government    159 

and  efficiency,  irrespective  of  his  opinion  as  to 
whether  the  tax  rate  is  too  high  or  too  low,  the 
bridge  unnecessary,  the  building  regulations  im- 
perfect, or  as  to  any  other  matter  of  city  policy. 
Experience  shows  that  any  other  course  introduces 
considerations  that  deteriorate  the  city's  adminis- 
trative service  in  manifold  ways.  A  sure  means  of 
making  city  government  extravagant,  wasteful, 
inefficient,  and  liable  to  corruption  is  to  permit 
positions  in  its  purely  administrative  service  to 
be  secured  or  held  for  any  reason  other  than  hon- 
esty, efficiency,  and  the  faithful  performance  of 
official  duty. 

City  officials  the  performance  of  whose  duties 
involves  issues  which  divide  their  fellow  citi- 
zens into  political  parties  are  fortunately  few. 
Fortunately,  because,  if  the  merit  principle  be 
consistently  and  thoroughly  applied  to  all  other 
offices,  the  attention  of  the  voters  can  be  con- 
centrated on  the  few  political  officers  who  are 
chosen  to  represent  the  prevailing  opinion  as 
to  the  policy  which  shall  control  the  conduct 
of  the  city's  public  affairs.  This  can  not  fail  to 
make  for  a  responsible  and  representative  city 
government. 

6.  The  structural  plan  of  a  city  government 
should  be  simple,  centering  in  a  few  elected  officials 
responsibility  to  the  people  for  its  conduct. 

One  of  the  greatest  obstacles  to  the  betterment 
of  city  government  in  the  United  States  has  been 


160    Government  of  American  Cities 

the  incongruous  multitude  of  elective  city  offices. 
It  is  obvious  that  the  more  numerous  the  offices 
to  be  filled  by  popular  vote,  the  more  difficult  it 
is  for  the  voter  to  exercise  any  wisely  discriminat- 
ing choice,  to  have  any  real  knowledge  of  the 
relative  fitness  of  the  candidates  or  of  the  duties 
and  powers  of  the  offices  they  seek.  This  of 
itself  is  sufficient  to  condemn  the  multiplication 
of  elective  offices.  The  evil  is  further  aggravated 
when  the  issues  upon  which  a  popular  election 
should  turn  are  hopelessly  confused  by  making 
officials  elective  the  performance  of  whose  duties 
involves  none  of  the  differences  of  opinion  that  di- 
vide men  into  opposing  political  parties.  It  is  an 
axiom  of  political  science  that  such  officials  are 
non-political  and,  therefore,  should  be  non-elective. 
But  not  only  are  the  voters  confused  and  the 
issues  confused  at  the  time  of  elections;  the  evil 
does  not  stop  with  the  election.  Distribution  of 
authority  among  a  great  number  of  elective  offices 
dissipates  responsibility  for  the  exercise  of  the 
authority.  City  dwellers  in  the  United  States 
have  become  only  too  familiar  with  the  results  of 
this  system,  or  rather  lack  of  system — a  weak  and 
incompetent  city  government,  necessarily  waste- 
ful and  extravagant,  peculiarly  liable  to  become 
corrupt. 

Exactly  the  opposite  course  has  been  followed 
in  England  for  three  quarters  of  a  century  and 
with  exactly  the  opposite  results.  One  of  the 
main  factors  in  producing  the  relatively  better 


Pre-requisites  to  Self-Government    161 

government  of  the  English  cities  has  been  that  the 
municipal  voter  there  has  been  called  upon  to 
vote  for  but  one  city  officer  (member  of  the 
council)  and  that  all  responsibility  for  the  exercise 
of  the  governmental  powers  granted  the  city  has 
been  centered  in  a  single  body  (the  council). 
This  is  also  the  plan  that  has  been  followed  with 
success  in  several  of  the  cities  of  Texas  and  of 
other  states  which  have  adopted  the  "Galveston 
plan." 

It  is  very  easy  to  determine  what  city  officials 
should  be  elected.  Only  those  charged  with  the 
duty  of  representing  while  in  office  the  declared 
will  of  the  people,  or  of  taking  active  part  in 
deciding  questions  of  local  political  policy  arising 
during  their  term  of  office,  should  be  elected.  The 
duties  of  such  officials  are  political.  The"y  should 
hold  office  directly  from  the  people  and  be  directly 
accountable  to  the  people  for  their  official  conduct. 

Officials  charged  with  purely  administrative  or 
judicial  duties  are  in  no  sense  political  and  should 
be  appointed,  not  elected. 

7.  The  successful  candidates  for  elective  city 
office  should  represent  the  prevailing  local  sentiment 
upon  issues  of  city  politics. 

It  will  aid  in  accomplishing  this  result  if  city 
elections  be  separated  from  all  other  elections. 
But,  whether  so  separated  or  not,  they  should 
turn  upon  local  political  issues,  not  upon  national 
or  state  political  issues.  The  intrusion  of  these 


1 62    Government  of  American  Cities 

latter  into  a  local  campaign  should  be  regarded 
and  resented  as  an  impertinence. 

Why  do  we  elect  city  officials  at  all?  Is  it  not 
in  order  that  the  government  of  a  city  may  be 
accountable  to  and  therefore  conducted  in  accord- 
ance with  the  prevailing  local  public  opinion? 
And  how  shall  we  accomplish  this  unless  we  have 
electoral  methods  that  enable  us  in  city  campaigns 
to  give  our  undivided  attention  to  the  discussion 
of  questions  of  city  policy  and  the  selection  of  men 
who  will  after  their  election  be  accountable  to 
us  for  their  conduct  of  the  city's  public  affairs? 
If  these  are  not  the  purposes,  why  should  we 
have  any  city  elections  ?  If  we  believe  in  democ- 
racy, if  we  believe  that  a  city  should  be  governed 
in  accordance  with  the  ascertained  and  deliberately 
expressed  wishes  of  its  own  citizens  and  not  in 
accordance  with  the  views  of  some  outside  or 
superimposed  authority,  we  must  be  quick  to 
appreciate  that  the  confusion  and  complexity 
caused  by  the  multiplicity  of  elective  offices  to 
be  filled,  and  of  unrelated  political  issues  thrust 
upon  our  attention  at  city  elections,  are  among 
the  chief  obstacles  to  the  city's  becoming  a  really 
self-governing  community,  to  our  having  a  city 
government  really  representative  of  the  prevailing 
local  public  opinion. 

This  is  not  primarily  a  question  of  politics  or 
political  partisanship,  but  a  question  of  doing  our 
duty  as  voters  in  a  simple,  straightforward,  busi- 
ness-like fashion.  Is  it  not  intrinsically  absurd  to 


Pre-requisites  to  Self-Go vernment    163 

attempt  the  selection  of  fit  men  to  conduct  our  city 
government,  and  to  busy  ourselves  at  the  same 
time  and  in  the  same  campaign  trying  to  reform 
the  nation  or  the  state?  Why  not  admit  that 
it  is  beyond  our  capacity  to  form  an  intelligent 
judgment  with  regard  to  the  fitness  of  the  numer- 
ous candidates  competing  for  a  long  list  of  of- 
fices, national,  state  and  local,  some  political, 
others  non-political?  How  can  we  hope  to  gain 
good  city  government  if  our  minds  and  those 
of  our  fellow-citizens  to  whom  we  address  our 
arguments  as  to  questions  of  city  policy  are 
confused  by  the  contemporaneous  discussion  of 
questions  of  national  and  state  policy? 

The  confusion  of  ideas  caused  by  the  mingling 
of  national,  state,  and  local  political  issues  in  the 
same  campaign  makes  intelligent,  not  to  say 
discriminating,  exercise  of  the  suffrage  impossible 
not  merely  in  the  interest  of  the  city,  but  equally 
impossible  in  the  interest  of  the  state  or  the  nation. 
And  this  is  so  not  because  of  any  criticism  of, 
or  any  unsoundness  in,  the  political  principles 
of  any  national  political  party.  It  is  because  it 
is  impossible  at  the  same  time  to  give  attention, 
adequate  to  the  importance  of  each,  to  national 
issues,  upon  the  correct  decision  of  which  one 
thinks  the  country's  future  may  depend,  and 
to  vital  questions  of  city  policy  such,  for  ex- 
ample, as  the  city's  relation  to  its  traction 
companies.  The  task  is  beyond  human  capac- 
ity. Similarly  it  is  a  matter  of  ordinary  every- 


T  64    Government  of  American  Cities 

day  common-sense  that  the  more  numerous  are 
the  positions  for  which  we  are  called  upon  to 
choose  fit  candidates  the  less  likely  are  we  to 
be  wise  in  our  selection.  This  is  not  because  the 
positions  are  political,  but  because  there  are 
so  many  of  them.  In  one  of  our  large  western 
cities,  for  instance,  there  was  at  a  recent  elec- 
tion one  candidate  for  public  office  for  every 
five  hundred  inhabitants.  It  is  the  utterly  un- 
businesslike, wholly  impracticable  character  of 
such  methods  that  condemns  them.  The  exercise 
of  his  suffrage  with  discriminating  intelligence 
in  city  elections  is  an  impossibility  when  the  voter 
is  called  upon  at  one  and  the  same  time  to  discuss 
issues  of  local,  state,  and  national  politics  and  to 
examine  and  decide  upon  the  merits  of  the  long 
list  of  competing  candidates  for  mayor,  aldermen, 
city  comptroller,  and  other  city  offices,  besides 
another  list  of  candidates  for  county  and  state 
offices  and  perhaps  for  national  office  as  well. 
There  are  too  many  issues  and  too  many  can- 
didates for  the  intelligent  or  efficient  exercise  of 
the  suffrage.  It  is  not  at  all  surprising  under 
such  circumstances  that  men  with  a  well-deserved 
reputation  for  great  ability  and  public  spirit 
have  openly  admitted  the  impracticability  of 
exercising  either  intelligent  discrimination  or 
public  spirit  in  the  selection  of  the  candidates 
for  whom  they  voted — except,  possibly,  as  to 
two  or  three  of  the  long  list.  They  voted  as 
blindly  and  often  as  damagingly  to  the  public 


Pre-requisites  to  Self-Government    165 

interests  as  if  they  were  neither  endowed  with  a 
high  order  of  intelligence  nor  regardful  of  their 
civic  duty.  Is  stronger  or  more  convincing 
proof  needed  of  the  iniquity  of  such  electoral 
methods  than  that  they  have  reduced  even  high- 
minded  and  public-spirited  citizens  to  this  piti- 
ably helpless  condition? 

The  confinement  of  city  campaigns  to  the  dis- 
cussion of  local  issues  and  to  the  consideration  of 
the  merits  of  candidates  for  local  office  is  not 
hostile  to  political  partisanship,  nor  does  it  neces- 
sarily involve  the  propriety  or  the  need  of  activity 
by  the  local  branches  of  national  political  parties 
in  campaigns  for  city  office.  It  is  simply  the 
application  of  the  practical  common-sense  business 
principle  that  the  man  who  undertakes  to  do  too 
many  kinds  of  work  at  once  is  sure  to  botch  some 
of  them  and  reasonably  sure  to  botch  all  of  them. 

The  separation  of  city  from  other  elections  by 
any  appreciable  interval  will  be  more  conducive 
to  good  city  government  than  if  combined  with 
the  general  election  held  in  the  autumn;  but, 
when  possible,  the  interval  which  separates  city 
elections  from  all  others  should  be  at  least  a  year. 
This  has  the  double  advantage  of  avoiding  two 
elections  in  the  same  year  and  of  greatly  aid- 
ing the  exclusion  from  the  local  campaign  of 
all  political  questions  and  issues  that  are  not 
local. 

Since  1895  city  elections  in  New  York  have  been 
separated  by  an  interval  of  a  year  from  national 


1 66   Government  of  American  Cities 

elections,  and  no  candidate  for  state  political 
office  is  voted  for  at  a  city  election  except  for  the 
assembly — the  lower  branch  of  the  state  legisla- 
ture. The  inclusion  of  candidates  for  the  assem- 
bly among  the  officials  to  be  voted  for  has  been  a 
very  serious  hindrance  to  the  complete  separation 
of  local  from  state  and  national  issues,  especially 
in  a  year  when  the  state  legislature  will  elect  a 
United  States  senator.  That  there  are  also  far  too 
many  offices1  to  be  filled  by  popular  vote  is  a 
further  hindrance,  and  the  form  of  ballot  required 
by  New  York  law  is  actively  hostile  to  the  confine- 
ment of  city  elections  to  city  issues.  But  in 
spite  of  these  obstacles  the  cities  of  New  York  have 
in  considerable  measure  escaped  from  the  hopeless 
plight  in  which  they  were  under  the  electoral 
methods  in  use  prior  to  1895.  There  has  been  a 
marked  improvement  in  the  character  and  ability 
of  the  higher  elective  city  officials,  and  in  several 
instances  in  recent  years  city  campaigns  have 
been  conducted  almost  exclusively  upon  local 
issues,  with  better  city  government  as  a  result. 

II 

THE  CITY  AS  A  SUBORDINATE     ADMINISTRATIVE     AGENT 
OF    THE    STATE 

8.     When  a  city  is  made  the  agent  of  the  state  to 

1  E.  g.,  county  offices,  such  as  sheriff,  county  clerk,  district 
attorney,  and  members  of  the  state  judiciary,  as  well  as 
strictly  city  offices. 


Pre-requisites  to  Self-Government  167 

enforce  and  administer  general  laws  within  the  cor- 
porate limits  it  should  never  be  subjected  to  the 
vagaries  of  arbitrary  special  legislation,  but  should 
always  be  under  the  supervision  of  and  responsi- 
ble to  the  appropriate  central  state  administrative 
department. 

The  general  laws  of  the  state  must  be  enforced 
within  the  corporate  limits  of  the  city,  and  such 
laws,  being  general  in  their  nature,  must  be 
the  work  of  the  state  legislature.  But  the 
administration  of  these  laws  is  not  a  legislative 
function.  The  state  legislature  makes  the  state 
laws  as  to  banking,  but  the  banking  department, 
not  the  state  legislature,  supervises  the  banks 
and  enforces  the  banking  laws.  In  similar  fash- 
ion, the  supervision  and  control  of  the  enforce- 
ment of  every  general  state  law  should  be  the  care 
of  one  of  the  state  administrative  departments. 
When  the  state  legislature  concerns  itself  with 
administrative  details,  cumbrousness  and  ineffi- 
ciency characterize  and  partisan  politics  infects  the 
administration. 

When  the  state  delegates  to  the  municipal 
corporation  the  duty  of  administering  a  general 
law  within  its  corporate  limits,  the  city  as  an 
administrative  agent  of  the  state  is  properly 
subject  to  state  supervision,  but  it  should  be 
administrative  supervision,  not  legislative.  The 
appropriate  central  state  administrative  depart- 
ment should  be  given  the  requisite  authority  to 


1 68    Government  of  American  Cities 

compel  the  satisfactory  carrying  out  by  the 
muncipality  of  the  state  policy,  e.  g.  the  right  to 
withhold  state  moneys  unless  the  state  standard 
is  attained. 

9.  //  a  state  policy  is  repugnant  to  the  prevailing 
sentiment  of  the  citizens  of  a  city,  or  of  a  large  pro- 
portion of  them,  the  state  should  not  attempt  to  use 
the  city  government  to  administer  the  policy;  for 
this  means  the  employment  of  an  agent  actively 
hostile  to  its  enforcement. 

It  must  be  always  held  in  mind  that  the  elected 
officials  of  a  city,  which  is  made  an  administrative 
agent  of  the  state  to  enforce  a  state  law,  are  called 
upon  to  perform  two  radically  distinct  functions: 
(i)  to  harmonize  their  official  conduct  with  the 
local  public  opinion;  (2)  to  enforce  the  state  law 
whether  such  enforcement  is  or  is  not  pleasing 
to  the  local  public  opinion.  In  this  latter  capacity 
they  are  no  more  city  officials  than  is  a  judge  of 
the  state  supreme  court,  or  a  sheriff  or  county 
clerk.  It  is  not  only  logically  absurd  for  the 
state  to  entrust  the  enforcement  of  its  policy 
to  agents  who  have  been  elected  by  a  public 
sentiment  opposed  to  the  policy,  but  it  is  politically 
vicious  and  demoralizing. 

To  sum  up :  A  city  should  be  a  local  government 
clothed  with  ample  power  to  satisfy  all  the  local 
needs  of  the  community  within  its  corporate 
limits.  It  cannot  be  such  a  government  unless 


Pre-requisites  to  Self-Go vernment    169 

it  can  decide  all  questions  of  purely  local  policy 
for  itself  and  organize  its  own  methods  for  en- 
forcing the  policy.  The  framework  of  the  govern- 
ment of  a  city  should  be  the  one  which  its  citizens 
find  best  suited  to  the  peculiarities  of  their  own 
local  conditions  and  circumstances,  but  it  should 
be  simple,  centering  authority  and  responsibility 
in  a  few  elected  officials,  and  the  election  of  these 
officials  should  be  separated  by  a  considerable 
interval,  preferably  a  year,  from  all  other  elections 
to  public  office.  The  officials  of  a  city  should 
never  be  entrusted  with  the  enforcement  of  a 
state  law  whose  policy  runs  counter  to  strong 
local  sentiment,  and  whenever  a  city  is  made  an 
administrative  agent  of  the  state  it  should  be 
accountable  to  the  appropriate  state  administra- 
tive department  and  not  to  the  state  legislature. 
Such  a  city  would  have  power  to  solve  its  own 
problems.  Its  only  elected  city  officials  would  be, 
for  example,  a  mayor  and  a  city  legislature.  Its 
citizens  would  have  only  the  candidates  for  those 
offices  to  think  of  at  election  time,  and  it  would 
devolve  upon  these  few  officials,  elected  by  and 
representative  of  the  citizens  of  the  city,  to  devise 
a  local  system  of  administration  appropriate  to 
the  city's  needs.  The  people  of  the  city  would 
then  know  with  certainty  whom  to  hold  responsible 
for  results.  They  would  not  have  to  consult  an 
indefinite  number  of  statute  books  nor  get  the 
help  of  a  corporation  lawyer  to  find  out  for  them — 
and  very  likely  not  find  out  even  then.  The 


170  Government  of  American  Cities 

mayor  would  be  responsible  for  the  efficient 
administration  of  the  various  departments  and 
could  not  hide  behind  anybody;  and  the  local 
legislature  would  be  responsible  with  the  mayor 
for  the  policy  pursued  in  the  conduct  of  the  local 
government.  The  city  would  have  a  simple 
government  and  a  responsible  government.  It 
is  not  that  a  city  is  a  business  corporation;  it  is 
not  that  its  citizens  are  stockholders  in  a  business 
corporation ;  it  is  that  we  must  apply  to  our  public 
business  the  principles  of  simplicity  and  respon- 
sibility which  we  apply  in  our  private  business. 

The  local  conditions  in  different  parts  of  the 
country  differ  widely  among  themselves,  and  the 
methods  to  be  used  and  the  obstacles  to  be  over- 
come in  the  attainment  of  simple,  responsible  city 
government  will  differ  widely  in  different  places; 
and  so,  in  all  probability,  will  the  form  of  govern- 
ment in  which  this  democratic  ideal  will  be 
embodied.  In  a  country  presenting  such  a  diver- 
sity as  ours  it  would  be  both  useless  to  expect  and 
undesirable  to  have  development  according  to  one 
model.  But  the  underlying  principles  of  good 
city  government  and  the  need  of  putting  those 
principles  into  practical  operation  are  the  same 
in  every  part  of  the  country  and,  for  that  matter, 
are  as  clearly  illustrated  and  established  by  the 
municipal  experience  of  Europe  as  of  the  United 
States. 


CHAPTER  XII 

HOW    THE    OPPORTUNITY    FOR    LOCAL    SELF- 
GOVERNMENT    MUST    BE    WON 

IF  no  outside  authority  intervened  and  if  the 
character  of  a  city's  government  were  solely 
dependent  upon  the  efforts  of  its  own  citizens, 
they  would  presently  find  a  way  to  have  one 
admirably  adapted  to  the  local  needs.  A  city 
must  win  good  government  through  having  those 
charged  with  the  conduct  of  its  local  public  affairs 
directly  accountable  to  its  own  citizens.  It  must 
be  self -governed,  not  state-governed.  But  the 
city  is  a  corporation  and  possesses  only  such  rights 
as  the  state  confers.  It  is  to  the  state,  then,  that 
we  must  look  for  the  grant  to  our  cities  of  the 
requisite  power  to  enable  them  to  be  self-govern- 
ing. The  notorious  exploitation  of  cities  by  the 
state  legislature  and  its  maleficent  interference 
with  the  conduct  of  their  local  affairs  have  wrought 
such  endless  mischief  that,  at  first,  it  would 
seem  as  if  our  efforts  should  be  directed  primarily 
toward  securing  amendments  to  the  state  con- 
stitutions which  would  effectively  prevent  this 
misdirected  legislative  activity. 

171 


172    Government  of  American  Cities 

Fortunate  indeed  would  be  the  state  and  the 
cities  of  the  state  whose  constitution  guaranteed 
to  each  city  ample  local  governmental  powers  and 
compelled  it  to  find  a  way  to  exercise  them  with- 
out aid  or  hindrance  from  any  external  authority. 
But  it  is  very  rare  that  any  change  in  a  state  con- 
stitution is  needed  in  order  to  confer  upon  a  city 
the  right  to  govern  itself  or  that  it  would  be  pre- 
vented from  establishing  its  own  local  adminis- 
trative system  by  any  constitutional  inhibition. 
There  is  not  a  local  governmental  power  which 
is  not  already  possessed  by  some  city  in  the 
United  States ;  there  is  no  sound  reason  why  each 
city  should  not  have  every  local  governmental 
power.  Every  variety  of  scheme  of  local  govern- 
ment is  already  in  use;  no  state  constitution 
forbids  the  adoption  of  a  very  simple  scheme  cen- 
tering responsibility  in  a  few  elected  officials.  Nor 
is  any  constitutional  change  needed  to  enable  a 
city  to  frame  its  own  charter.  This  can  as  legally 
be  done  by  providing  for  a  local  charter  conven- 
tion and  enacting  its  recommendations  into  law  as 
by  placing  on  the  statute  book  the  recommenda- 
tions of  a  state  legislative  committee  or  of  a  state- 
appointed  charter  commission.  The  separation 
of  city  elections  from  all  other  elections  does  not 
require  an  amendment  to  the  constitution,  unless 
to  make  the  separation  by  a  whole  year's  interval. 

Just  as  constitutional  safeguards  are  desirable 
to  protect  the  fundamental  rights  of  individual 
citizens,  so  will  they  be  eminently  desirable  to 


Winning  the  Opportunity         173 

protect  our  cities  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  right 
of  self-government  when  that  right  has  been  won. 
But  the  winning  of  that  right,  like  every  political 
advance  in  the  United  States,  must  be  obtained,  in 
the  first  instance,  through  an  aroused  and  in- 
telligent public  opinion.  If  a  public  opinion 
cannot  be  developed  of  sufficient  persistence  and 
strength  to  compel  the  state  legislature  to  give 
the  city  self-government,  what  ground  is  there 
for  supposing  that  a  public  opinion  can  be  de- 
veloped of  sufficient  persistence  and  strength  to 
induce  the  legislature  to  submit  for  the  action 
of  the  people  constitutional  amendments  that 
would  give  the  cities  self-government,  or  that  a 
constitutional  convention  will  be  elected  whose 
members  will  be  more  responsive  to  the  popu- 
lar will  or  more  representative  of  the  popular 
wishes  than  the  members  of  the  state  legislature? 
The  aroused  and  intelligent  public  opinion 
which  clearly  perceives  that  it  is  essential  to 
good  city  government  in  the  United  States  that 
the  city  should  be  governed  by  its  citizens,  and 
is  strong  enough  to  secure  amendments  to  the 
state  constitution  emancipating  the  city  from 
interference  by  external  authority,  will  without 
such  amendments  procure  from  the  state  legisla- 
ture the  enactment  of  laws  that  will  enable  cities 
to  become  self-governing  communities.  And  the 
state  legislature  that  would  enact  such  laws  in 
response  to  the  popular  demand  for  them  would 
submit  for  the  action  of  the  people  constitutional 


174    Government  of  American  Cities 

amendments  to  safeguard  the  cities  in  the  rights 
thus  acquired  and  to  protect  them  from  assault. 
In  its  final  analysis,  therefore,  the  attainment 
of  good  city  government  will  depend  upon  the 
extent  and  sincerity  of  our  faith  in  representative 
government  and  upon  how  persistently  and 
intelligently  we  will  work  to  make  our  govern- 
ment representative,  state  as  well  as  local.  The 
representative  local  government  which  our  cities 
need  for  the  development  of  a  wholesome,  self- 
reliant,  and  efficient  community-life  can  be  secured 
only  as  the  result  of  state  action  in  response  to 
a  widespread  and  persistent  popular  demand. 
Imperfect  as  are  our  present  electoral  methods 
for  giving  effect  to  the  people's  will,  such  a  demand 
will  ultimately  be  heeded  by  state  legislatures 
and,  the  right  of  self-government  once  gained,  such 
constitutional  amendments  as  may  be  needed  to 
safeguard  it  will  follow. 

Agitation,  enlightenment,  persuasion,  intelligent 
opportunism — these  are  the  methods  through 
which  every  political  advance  has  been  made  in 
the  United  States.  It  is  through  them  that  our 
cities  must  win  the  right  of  self-government. 
And  these  democratic  methods  are  effective.  Let 
us  take  brief  note  of  some  of  the  things  that  an 
aroused  public  opinion  has  accomplished  through 
legislative  action  during  recent  years  for  the 
betterment  of  city  government. 

Chicago  has  shown  what  public  opinion  could 


Winning  the  Opportunity         175 

effect  toward  democratizing  the  city  government 
even  under  an  imperfect  and  cumbrous  charter,  if 
the  state  legislature  is  permitted  neither  to  help 
nor  hinder.  The  constitution  of  Texas  in  express 
terms  conferred  upon  the  state  legislature  the 
dangerous  power  to  make  special  city  charters; 
Galveston  has  proved  that  an  aroused  public 
sentiment  could  compel  the  legislature  to  use 
this  power  to  benefit  instead  of  to  exploit  the  city. 
Emboldened  by  the  success  of  Galveston,  other 
cities  of  Texas  have  one  by  one  presented  to  the 
state  legislature  an  insistent  demand  for  a  local 
government  of  simple  structure  and  centering 
responsibility  in  a  very  few  locally  elected 
officials ;  and  the  legislature  has  granted  to  each 
city  the  special  charter  its  local  sentiment  in- 
sisted upon  having.  The  constitutions  of  Iowa, 
Kansas,  North  and  South  Dakota  forbade  special 
charter  legislation  for  cities;  but,  in  response  to 
the  popular  demand  to  share  in  the  benefits  of 
what  had  been  accomplished  in  Texas,  the  legis- 
latures of  those  states  have  enacted  a  general  law 
under  the  terms  of  which  any  city  may  have  a 
simple  framework  of  government,  and  the  re- 
sponsiblity  for  its  conduct  centered  in  a  very 
few  locally  elected  officials.  Within  recent  years 
the  people  of  New  York  and  other  states 
have  increasingly  resented  and  greatly  restrained 
the  interference  by  the  state  legislature  with  the 
local  affairs  of  cities,  and  the  chief  executives  of 
state  after  state  have  been  winning  popular 


176   Government  of  American  Cities 

approval  by  vetoes  of  this  class  of  legislation. 
In  Iowa  and  South  Dakota  the  initiative  and 
referendum  are  among  the  charter  powers  granted 
to  cities  organized  under  the  "  Board  of  Directors' 
or  Galveston  Plan." 

The  charter  changes  adopted  and  attempted 
during  the  last  ten  years  in  the  wide-spread  effort 
to  make  city  governments  more  simple  in  form 
and  more  responsible  and  responsive  to  the  citizens 
of  the  city  would  make  a  formidably  long  cata- 
logue. Even  more  significant  has  been  the  steady 
progress  of  the  movement  in  all  parts  of  the 
United  States  to  secure  for  the  city  more  and  more 
of  the  governmental  powers  requisite  to  satisfy 
the  local  needs — the  primary  purpose  for  which 
the  city  exists  as  a  local  government.  Speaking 
generally,  it  may  be  said  with  truth  that  the  more 
recent  the  revision  of  a  city's  "charter"  the  more 
liberal  and  the  more  comprehensive  has  been  the 
grant  of  power. 

These  are  some  of  the  results  that  a  public 
opinion  which  saw  clearly  and  demanded  persist- 
ently what  it  wanted,  has  accomplished  in  recent 
years  through  legislative  action  without  waiting 
for  constitutional  amendments.  There  is  no 
sound  reason  of  public  policy  why  a  city  should 
not  have  all  the  governmental  powers  requisite 
for  its  healthy,  vigorous,  and  complete  self- 
development.  It  is  certain,  as  knowledge  spreads 
of  the  great  benefits  to  both  state  and  city  demon- 
strated by  actual  experience  whenever  a  city  has 


Winning  the  Opportunity         177 

had  these  powers,  that  an  intelligent  and  aroused 
public  opinion  will  compel  our  state  legislatures 
to  grant  more  and  more  governmental  powers  to 
cities  and  to  couple  with  the  grant  of  power  the 
right  freely  to  exercise  it. 

It  is  only  by  democratic  methods  that  good  city 
government  can  be  achieved  or  maintained  in  the 
United  States;  and  the  public  opinion  that 
obtained  local  self-government  from  the  state 
legislature  of  Iowa  by  general  law,  and  reduced  to 
a  mere  formality  the  constitutional  provisions 
requiring  the  submission  of  a  home-made  charter 
to  the  legislature  of  California  for  ratification, 
will  incorporate  in  the  state  constitution  whatever 
provisions  are  needed  to  safeguard  the  city  in 
the  enjoyment  of  its  hard-won  rights  as  a  self- 
governing  community. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  ELECTORAL  METHODS  USED  IN 
FILLING  CITY  ELECTIVE  OFFICES 

EMANCIPATING  the  city  from  the  control  of 
the  state  legislature  and  clothing  it  with 
ample  powers  to  perform  all  the  functions  of  local 
government  will  not  of  themselves  make  the  city 
a  really  self-governing  community.  That  problem 
will  still  remain  to  be  solved. 

A  city  is  not  a  self-governing  community  if  its 
elected  officials  represent,  in  the  conduct  of  its 
public  affairs,  special  interests  or  persons  rather 
than  the  general  interest  of  all  the  citizens.  We 
must  not  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that,  when  the  city 
has  been  freed  from  state  legislative  meddling 
and  has  obtained  the  right  to  be  a  fully  equipped 
local  government,  its  citizens  have  still  before  them 
the  task  of  making  that  government  representa- 
tive of  their  will.  Until  this  task  shall  have  been 
accomplished  the  city  will  not  be  a  self-governing 
community;  and  this  will  never  be  accomplished 
until  some  way  be  found  to  hold  those  entrusted 
with  the  conduct  of  a  city's  public  affairs  readily 
and  surely  accountable,  not  to  special  interests 

178 


Importance  of  Electoral  Methods     179 

or  particular  individuals  or  groups,  but  to  the 
general  body  of  the  citizens. 

The  use  of  governmental  power  in  the  interest 
of  part  of  the  people,  instead  of  in  the  interest  of 
all  of  the  people,  is  not  peculiar  to  city  govern- 
ment. It  is  the  fundamental  political  trouble  in 
the  United  States,  the  prolific  source  of  innumera- 
ble public  evils  and  consequent  popular  unrest. 
To  prevent  the  misrepresentation  of  the  public 
interest  through  the  possession  of  the  powers  of 
government  by  representatives  of  special  interests 
is  the  problem  of  problems  in  city,  state,  and 
nation.  "The  shame  of  the  cities"  has  been 
more  exploited,  in  the  press  and  by  political 
writers  of  the  day ;  but  there  has  been  as  frequent 
cause  for  shame,  and  the  shame  has  been  as 
flagrant,  in  national  and  state  as  in  city  govern- 
ment. The  truth  is  that  authority  will  always  be 
exercised  in  accordance  with  the  wishes  of  those 
who  give  and  can  take  away  the  authority;  and 
the  relatively  small  number  of  persons  who,  at  any 
given  time,  are  carrying  on  the  business  of  govern- 
ment will,  of  necessity,  endeavor  to  comply  with 
the  wishes  of  those  who  have  put  them  in  power 
and  to  whose  support  they  look  for  a  continuance 
of  the  power. 

Every  government,  whatever  its  outward  form, 
is  representative.  The  supremely  vital  questions 
are:  Of  what  is  it  representative  and  of  whom? 
what  are  the  interests  and  who  are  the  men  whose 
approval  or  condemnation  determines  who  shall 


180    Government  of  American  Cities 

or  shall  not  wield  the  powers  of  government?  and 
through  what  methods  is  their  determination 
made  effective? — for  these  are  the  interests  and 
these  are  the  men  who  can  and  do  enforce  ac- 
countability for  the  conduct  of  the  government. 

Confining  our  attention  to  city  government, — 
a  city  is  a  self-governing  community  just  to  the 
extent  that  the  policy  of  its  government  is 
in  conformity  with  the  prevailing  local  public 
opinion.  And  this  will  be  true  just  to  the  extent 
that  those  conducting  the  local  public  affairs 
may  be  readily  and  surely  held  accountable  to 
the  local  electorate.  In  a  really  self-governing 
community,  this  accountability  will  be  complete. 

That  the  city  should  be  granted  the  right  to 
exercise  every  needed  local  governmental  power 
is  an  essential  preliminary.  A  city  government 
which  concentrates  responsibility  for  the  perform- 
ance of  all  policy-determining  functions  in  a  few 
elected  officials,  makes  all  other  officials  ap- 
pointive, separates  elections  to  city  office  from 
all  other  elections,  and  organizes  the  city's  purely 
administrative  service  upon  the  merit  system, 
will  be  a  most  important  aid.  Under  such  con- 
ditions the  citizens  could  always  identify  the  public 
officers  clothed  with  authority  to  exercise  the 
policy-determining  functions  of  the  government, 
and  therefore  responsible  for  the  policy  pursued; 
there  would  be  no  confusion  of  mind  or  dissipation 
of  effort  because  of  the  multitude  of  offices  to  be 
filled  at  election-time,  and  the  local  issues  to  be 


Importance  of  Electoral  Methods    181 

decided  in  the  city  election  would  not  be  likely 
to  be  distorted  by  or  subordinated  to  issues  of 
state  or  national  political  import.  There  could 
not  fail  to  be  aroused  an  intelligent  and  general 
interest  among  the  citizens  in  the  actual  operation 
of  such  a  government;  the  voters  would  under- 
stand precisely  who  were  responsible  for  its  con- 
duct. But  there  would  still  remain  the  problem 
of  enforcing  responsibility  to  them  for  the  policy 
pursued. 

Not  even  freeing  the  city  from  the  domination 
of  external  authority  and  giving  it  a  government 
of  simple  structure,  such  as  we  have  described, 
easily  understood  by  every  citizen — that  centers 
responsibility  for  the  exercise  of  the  city's  powers 
in  a  few  elected  officials,  separates  city  elections 
and  city  issues  from  all  others,  and  awakens  in- 
telligent interest  in  the  conduct  of  the  city's 
public  affairs  among  the  general  body  of  the 
citizens — will  make  a  city  a  really  self-governing 
community.  There  must  still  be  provided  full 
opportunity  for  the  prevailing  local  public  opinion 
to  be  authentically  ascertained  and  adequate 
means  to  put  the  representatives  of  this  opinion 
in  possession  of  the  city's  elective  public  offices. 
No  scheme  of  city  government  in  the  United  States 
is  worth  consideration  which  does  not  make  ade- 
quate provision  for  the  full,  free,  and  deliberate 
expression  of  the  wishes  of  the  voters  and  for 
carrying  their  wishes  into  effect.  A  public  opinion 
that  cannot  be  authoritatively  expressed  and 


1 82     Government  of  American  Cities 

effectively  carried  out  is,  for  all  practical  purposes, 
non-existent.  By  whatever  route  we  approach, 
from  whatsoever  point  of  view  we  study,  the 
problem  of  city  government  in  the  United  States, 
in  final  analysis,  its  ultimate  solution  will  depend 
upon  the  intelligent  application  of  the  representa- 
tive principle.  And  to  this  end  the  importance 
of  the  electoral  methods  in  use  for  filling  city 
elective  offices  cannot  be  exaggerated. 

Even  under  the  favoring  circumstances  we 
have  described,  the  prevailing  local  public  opin- 
ion cannot  be  authentically  ascertained  and  its 
representatives  cannot  be  put  in  control  of  the 
city's  government,  unless  the  methods  by  which 
the  few  elected  officials  are  chosen  make  easily 
possible : 

1.  That,  at  any  and  all  times,  each  nominee  for 
elective  office  shall  be  the  choice  of  a  greater 
number  of  the  voters  who  wish  to  put  into  practi- 
cal operation  the  policy  he  claims  to  represent 
than  any  other  person  competing  with  him  for 
nomination  as  its  representative;  and,  afterwards, 

2.  That,  as  between  the  different  policies  which 
are  urged  upon  the  attention  of  voters,  the  policy 
shall  be  successful  whose  representative  secures 
the  largest  popular  support. 

How  can  the  prevailing  local  public  opinion  as 
to  the  policy  of  a  city  government  be  authentic- 
ally ascertained  or  effectively  carried  out  unless, 
first,  the  choice  of  representatives  of  policies  com- 
peting for  popular  support  and,  secondly,  the 


Importance  of  Electoral  Methods    183 

decision  between  the  competing  policies  is  each 
made  by  the  voters  themselves  after  opportunity  for 
full,  fair,  and  free  debate?  No  well-informed 
person  claims  that  our  present  nominating  and 
election  methods  accomplish  either  of  these  re- 
sults, and  until  electoral  methods  shall  be  estab- 
lished which  do  accomplish  them  city  government 
will  not  be  conducted  by  the  representatives  of 
the  prevailing  local  public  opinion,  and  the  men, 
in  or  out  of  office,  who  determine  the  policy  of  a 
city  government  will  not  be  accountable  to  the 
local  electorate. 

The  limits  of  the  present  volume  do  not  permit 
setting  forth  in  detail  the  defects  of  our  present 
electoral  system  or  the  remedies. 1  The  purpose 
now  is  to  call  attention  to  the  pressing  need  of 
substituting  other  methods  for  those  which,  how- 
ever they  may  have  suited  past  conditions,  have 
become  the  effective  agencies  through  which  pri- 
vate and  special  interests  gain  control  of  our  city 
governments.  Entirely  satisfactory  methods  may 
not  be  easily  found,  but,  in  our  search  for  them, 
we  must  not  hesitate  to  experiment.  We  must 
be  willing  to  put  to  the  test  of  actual  trial  any 
plan  which,  after  painstaking  and  open-minded 

1  For  a  discussion  of  this  subject,  see  Detroit  Conference  for 
Good  City  Government  (1903),  pp.  49-65;  Chicago  Conference 
for  Good  City  Government  (1904),  pp.  321-381;  New  York 
Conference  for  Good  City  Government  (1905),  pp.  97—110, 
295-372;  Atlantic  City  Conference  for  Good  City  Government 
(1906),  pp.  308-387,  and  C.  E.  Merriam,  Primary  Elections 
(University  of  Chicago  Press,  1908). 


1 84    Government  of  American  Cities 

study,  gives  us  reasonable  ground  to  hope  that 
those  who  wield  the  vast  powers  of  a  city  govern- 
ment will  be  made  accountable  to  the  voters  in- 
stead of  to  the  representatives — and  often  the 
dummies — of  private  business  interests.  The  evil 
is  radical,  we  must  not  be  afraid  to  apply  radical 
remedies.  The  exploiting  of  city  government  for 
private  profit  must  be  stopped;  and  it  will  be 
stopped  when  a  way  is  found  for  the  city's  voters 
to  put  in  power,  to  keep  in  power,  and  to  remove 
from  power  the  men  who  run  the  city  government. 

Genuine  local  self-government  is  the  ultimate 
foundation  upon  which  the  entire  superstructure 
of  our  political  institutions  must  rest  in  the 
United  States,  if  we  are  to  retain  the  measure  of 
freedom  we  already  have  and  to  continue  our 
peaceful  progress  toward  the  realization  of  a 
government  of  the  people  and  for  the  people, 
through  representatives  chosen  by  the  people. 
It  is  in  our  cities  that  the  supremely  vital  problem 
of  making  government  responsible  to  the  governed 
must  be  worked  out,  and  each  city  that  makes  a 
thorough  trial  of  any  plan  which  gives  fair  promise 
to  aid  in  the  solution  is  a  benefactor  to  all  other 
cities. 

The  personal  registration  laws,  ballot  laws,  and 
primary  laws  that  have  been  enacted  in  con- 
stantly increasing  number  during  recent  years, 
and  the  vigorous  movement  in  widely  separated 
parts  of  the  country  for  the  initiative,  the  refer- 
endum, and  the  recall,  are  evidence  of  the  diligent 


Importance  of  Electoral  Methods    185 

search  for  some  method  that  will  insure  that  the 
deliberate  will  of  the  people  shall  control  the 
policy  of  the  government.  No  doubt  still  other 
methods  not  yet  thought  of  will  be  devised. 
Not  the  least  of  the  public  benefits  which  will 
result  from  the  grant  of  complete  governmental 
power  to  a  city  within  its  corporate  limits  will  be 
the  opportunity  thereby  given  to  test  the  merits 
of  plans  to  accomplish  this1  result,  and  in  the  end 
it  must  be  accomplished,  or  government  by  the 
people  will  never  be  attained.  If  our  cities  have, 
as  they  should,  full  authority  to  establish  elec- 
toral methods  for  filling  elective  city  office, 
some  method  will  surely  be  found,  and  perhaps 
more  than  one,  which  assures  that  city  govern- 
ment be  responsible  and  responsive  to  the  local 
electorate.  Meantime,  and  until  cities  have  such 
full  authority,  the  least  that  the  state  can  do  is 
frankly  to  recognize  that  city  elections  should 
turn  upon  city  issues  and  to  make  such  recognition 
effective  by  abolishing,  in  the  case  of  candidates 
for  city  office,  the  practically  complete  monopoly 
of  nomination  vested  by  present  electoral  methods 
in  the  local  political  organizations  of  national 
political  parties. 

Very  slight  changes  in  our  election  laws  will  go 
far  towards  making  such  recognition  effective. 
In  most  of  our  states  there  is  now  an  official 
ballot  printed  and  furnished  at  public  expense. 
The  form  and  size  of  the  ballot,  the  order  and 
arrangement  of  the  names  upon  it,  the  style  of 


1 86    Government  of  American  Cities 

the  type,  the  color  and  quality  of  the  paper,  the 
methods  of  voting,  counting,  and  canvassing  it  are 
all  carefully  prescribed  by  law  in  minute  detail. l 
The  voter  must  use  this  ballot  or  lose  his  suffrage. 
Every  candidate  for  public  office  must  have  his 
name  upon  it.  The  guiding  and  controlling 
principle  of  such  a  law  should  be  justice.  Each 
voter  when  he  casts  his  ballot  is  the  peer  of  every 
other  voter;  and  whatever  the  political  principles 
of  a  candidate,  or  whatever  the  source  of  his 
nomination,  the  position  of  his  name  upon  the 
ballot  should  not  give  him  an  advantage  over 
his  competitors. 

There  are  no  complexities  in  the  rule  to  be 
followed  in  framing  an  official  ballot  law.  Simple 
fair-dealing  is  entirely  sufficient.  All  candidates 
for  the  same  office  whose  names  are  entitled  to 
appear  upon  the  official  ballot  should  receive  equal 
treatment  at  the  hands  of  the  state.  As  between 
candidates  for  the  same  office  it  should  be  just  as 
easy  and  just  as  hard  for  the  voter  to  perform 
the  physical  act  of  voting  for  one  as  for  another. 
The  names  of  candidates  for  the  same  office  should 
appear,  therefore,  upon  the  official  ballot  in 
alphabetical  order  under  the  title  of  the  office. 

Nine  tenths  of  the  complexities  and  intricacies 
of  our  present  election  laws  would  automatically 
disappear  if  these  simple  rules  were  followed. 
And  why  should  they  not  be  followed,  except  that 

»  See,  Philip  L.  Allen,  "  Ballot  Laws  and  their  Workings," 
in  Political  Science  Quarterly,  xxi.,  p.  38. 


Importance  of  Electoral  Methods     187 

complexity  and  intricacy  of  political  machinery 
make  for  the  advantage  of  the  "professional"  and 
therefore  of  the  private  interests  he  represents? 

According  equal  rights,  upon  the  official  ballot, 
to  all  candidates  for  the  same  office  would  also 
extend  and  liberalize  the  privilege  of  nomination 
by  petition  now  usually  granted  so  grudgingly 
and  with  many  hampering  restrictions  in  order 
to  discourage  its  use.  The  very  opposite  policy 
should  be  followed.  Freedom  of  nomination 
should  be  encouraged.  Nominations  to  city  elec- 
tive offices  are  not  made  difficult  because  of  any 
sound  reason  of  public  policy;  nor  can  any  one 
give  such  a  reason  for  granting  special  privileges 
or  preponderant  advantages,  in  the  matter  of  mak- 
ing such  nominations,  to  organizations  primarily 
interested  not  in  city  but  in  national  politics. 
Yet  it  is  notorious  that  this  is  precisely  what  is 
done  by  the  election  laws  of  many  of  our  states. 

Justice  and  fair-dealing  would  grant  to  no  person 
or  organization  special  favors  or  privileges  on  an 
official  ballot. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

A    CITY'S    CHARTER 

A  CITY'S  charter  should  bear  the  relation  to  the 
government  of  the  city  that  a  state  constitu- 
tion bears  to  the  government  of  the  state.  Neither 
should  be  cumbered  with  matters  of  legislation  or 
administration. 

A  city's  charter  should  contain  a  succinct,  but 
clear  and  comprehensive,  statement  of  the  govern- 
mental powers  granted,  with  the  limitations  and 
restrictions  upon  their  exercise.  This  part  of  the 
charter  is  necessarily  an  act  of  the  state  and  may 
be  either  a  state  statute  or  a  portion  of  the  state 
constitution.  Such  portions,  if  there  be  any, 
of  the  state  constitution  as  affect  cities,  and  such 
general  laws,  if  any  such  be  enacted  as  affect  all 
cities  alike,  should  also  be  regarded  as  a  part  of 
the  charter. 

A  city's  charter  should  also,  like  a  state  consti- 
tution, mark  out  the  ground  plan  of  the  govern- 
ment through  whose  various  organs  the  granted 
powers  are  to  be  exercised  and  should  provide 
an  orderly  and  feasible  method  for  its  own  amend- 

188 


A  City's  Charter  189 

ment.  This  part  of  the  charter  is  not  necessarily 
the  direct  act  of  the  state.  For  example,  plenary 
authority  could  be  granted  to  the  city's  voters  to 
frame  this  part  of  its  charter  through  methods 
analogous  to  those  through  which  the  general 
electorate  of  a  state  frame  the  state  constitution. 
But,  whether  the  direct  act  of  the  state  or  of  local 
origin,  this  part  of  the  charter  should  confine 
itself  to  designating  the  appropriate  governmental 
organs,  apportioning  authority  among  them, 
prescribing  the  qualifications  of  the  persons  who 
are  to  exercise  the  authority,  and  establishing  the 
methods  of  their  selection. 

It  would  be  difficult  to  find  anything  else  which 
has  a  legitimate  place  in  a  city  charter.  Details 
of  procedure  and  the  minutiae  of  administrative 
equipment  and  regulation  should  be  left  to  the 
duly  constituted  local  authorities.  They  are  no 
more  appropriate  in  the  organic  law  of  a  city  than 
of  a  state. 

That  the  ordinary  city  charter  is  very  different 
neither  detracts  from  the  merits  nor  disproves 
the  soundness  of  the  underlying  principles  of  the 
charter  here  outlined.  A  city,  to  be  sure,  is  a 
corporation,  but  what  more  is  needed  in  the 
charter  of  a  corporation  than  adequate  corporate 
powers  and  the  opportunity  for  its  members  fully 
and  freely  to  exercise  them?  If  this  be  done,  there 
will  be  no  lack  of  corporate  action  to  meet  every 
corporate  need.  And  how  else  shall  we  awaken 
enough  interest  among  its  members  to  assure  the 


i  go    Government  of  American  Cities 

management  of  the  corporation  in  their  interest? 
If  this  be  important  to  the  good  management  of  a 
private  corporation,  how  much  more  important 
is  it  in  the  case  of  a  public  corporation?  A  mem- 
ber of  a  private  corporation  can  resign  or  sell  out 
if  he  is  dissatisfied  with  its  conduct  and  cannot 
effect  any  change  for  the  better,  but  the  city  voter 
has  no  such  recourse.  The  municipal  corpora- 
tion, if  it  is  to  be  really  self-governing,  must  be 
granted  adequate  power  for  the  purpose  and  the 
city  voters  must  be  given  the  opportunity  to  exer- 
cise their  suffrage  effectively. 

A  complicated  and  cumbrous  congeries  of 
statutes,  falsely  called  a  charter,  whose  involved 
and  intricate  provisions  prevent  the  people  of  the 
city  from  either  identifying  or  effectively  holding 
accountable  the  persons  responsible  for  its  govern- 
ment is  an  instrument  admirably  adapted  for 
exploiting  the  many  in  the  interest  of  the  few. 
Innumerable  amendments  apparently  in  the 
interest  of  the  many  can  be  made  to  such  a 
"charter"  without  seriously  weakening  the  sinister 
clutch  of  the  few  who  hold  the  real  power.  A 
simple,  easily  intelligible  charter  drawn  upon 
the  broad  lines  here  advocated  would  place  the 
opponents  of  democracy  in  the  open  and  without 
the  advantage  of  concealed  weapons.  In  place 
of  the  innumerable  and  futile  controversies  about 
forms  and  methods,  there  would  be  intelligent 
discussion  and  effective  decision  of  the  important 
matters  of  local  public  policy.  Complexity  of 


A  City's  Charter  191 

political  methods  is  hostile  to  the  popular  control 
of  government. 

Possessing  such  a  charter  as  is  here  described, 
a  city  will  not  only  be  clothed  with  adequate 
power  to  perform  all  governmental  functions  ap- 
propriate to  its  sphere  of  action,  but  its  citizens  will 
have  brought  home  to  them  their  responsibility  for 
the  kind  of  government  under  which  they  live  and 
will  have  opportunity  to  make  it  truly  representa- 
tive of  their  ideas  both  in  character  and  efficiency. 

The  course  outlined  in  this  and  in  the  preceding 
chapters,  culminating  in  a  charter  which,  while 
preserving  the  due  superiority  of  the  state  yet 
sets  the  city  free  to  regulate  and  develop  its  own 
community  life,  marks  out  the  road  for  the  solu- 
tion of  both  the  legal  and  political  difficulties 
of  the  problem  of  city  government. 

A  city  thus  constituted  is  not  an  imperium  in 
imperio;  it  is  subject  to  the  central  authority  of 
the  state  in  all  matters  properly  within  the  latter's 
jurisdiction.  But  legislative  interference  is  elim- 
inated and  home  rule  is  made  not  only  possible 
but  compulsory. 

Does  any  one  believe  that  the  citizens  of  an 
American  city,  if  free  to  rely  on  themselves  and 
unable  to  secure  any  help  save  from  their  own 
patriotic  efforts,  would  fail  in  time  to  become  a 
self-governing  community  with  an  efficient,  re- 
sponsible, well-ordered  administration  adapted  to 
the  local  needs? 


CHAPTER  XV 

THE  CITY  THE  BATTLE-GROUND  OP  DEMOCRACY 

^ 

THE  political  forces  that  resist  every  advance 
toward  the  attainment  of  government  ac- 
countable to  the  people  governed  and  make  for 
the  establishment  of  a  government  in  the  interest 
of  a  privileged  few  are  nowhere  so  active  or  so 
powerful  as  in  the  city.  The  city  itself  creates 
the  economic  conditions  that  give  these  forces 
full  play.  The  urgent  needs  of  the  city's  com- 
munity-life for  water,  transportation,  light,  tele- 
phonic communication,  and  similar  communal 
services  can  only  be  met  through  governmental 
action.  The  men  engaged  in  supplying  these 
services  are  necessarily  in  the  most  intimate 
and  constant  contact  with  the  city  government, 
while  the  business  interests  and  occupations  of 
the  vast  majority  of  men  bring  them  but  rarely 
if  at  all  into  conscious  relation  with  the  govern- 
ment of  the  city  in  which  they  live. 

On  the  one  hand,  the  satisfaction  of  urgent 
community-needs  has  created  a  class  of  special 
businesses  which  are  made  profitable  by  in- 
fluencing governmental  action;  on  the  other, 
is  the  great  mass  of  the  citizens  to  whom  any 

192 


The  Battle-Ground  of  Democracy    193 

special  effort  to  reach  or  influence  a  city  official 
involves  business  loss.  The  enj  overs  of  special 
r  privilege  have  been  constantly  watchful  of  the 
conduct  of  city  government  and  constantly 
active  in  securing  the  election  and  appointment 
of  public  officials  favorable  to  their  business 
plans.  The  general  body  of  the  citizens,  secure 
under  the  constitution  in  their  personal  and 
property  rights  and  absorbed  in  business  callings 
and  occupations  that  neither  need  special  assist- 
ance nor  invite  any  interference  from  the  city 
government,  have  paid,  at  most,  only  so  much 
attention  to  it  as  voting  for  their  regular  party 
candidates  on  election  day  might  require  and, 
perhaps,  at  times  contributing  to  their  party's 
treasury. 

^The  exploiters  of  the  need  for  transit,  light, 
and  other  public  services  have  found  in  each 
city  a  natural  ally  in  every  man  who  desired  some 
selfish  personal  advantage  from  its  government. 
The  domination  of  the  state  legislature  over 
municipal  affairs  brings  to  the  state  capital  the 
franchise  seekers  from  every  city,  there  to  work 
in  congenial  and  unwholesome  fellowship  with 
every  other  special  interest  in  quest  of  legislative 
largess.  Neither  is  the  hunter  of  governmental 
bounty  unknown  in  Washington.  His  insidious 
influence  has  been  felt  in  every  department  of 
our  government.  The  same  cause,  hunger  for 
the  enormously  valuable  special  privileges  at  the 
disposal  of  government  under  modern  economic 


194    Government  of  American  Cities 

conditions,  has  been  active  in  nation,  state,  and 
city. 

The  privilege-seeker  has  pervaded  our  political 
life.  For  his  own  profit  he  has  wilfully  befouled 
the  sources  of  political  power.  Politics,  which 
should  offer  a  career  inspiring  to  the  noblest 
thoughts  and  calling  for  the  most  patriotic  efforts 
of  which  man  is  capable,  he  has,  so  far  as  he  could, 
transformed  into  a  series  of  sordid  transactions 
between  those  who  buy  and  those  who  sell  govern- 
mental action.  His  success  has  depended  upon 
hiding  the  methods  by  which  he  has  gained  his 
ends.  All  the  forms  through  which  the  voters 
are  accustomed  to  exercise  their  rights  have 
been  strictly  observed.  Untroubled  by  con- 
scientious scruples,  consistently  non-partisan,  he 
has  welcomed  the  support  of  every  party  and 
been  prompt  to  reward  the  aid  of  any  political 
manager.  Step  by  step  he  gained  control  of 
the  party  machinery.  His  fellow  citizens  have 
been  in  profound  ignorance  that  he  named  all  the 
candidates  among  whom  they  made  their  futile 
choice  on  election  day. 

For  a  long  time  our  real  government  had  not 
been  the  one  described  in  constitution  or  statute ; 
our  electoral  methods  had  long  ceased  to  furnish 
a  genuine  opportunity  for  the  expression  of  the 
popular  will;  the  actual  government  had  passed 
into  the  control  of  an  elaborate  feudal  system 
with  its  lords  and  overlords,  each  with  his  retinue 
of  followers  and  dependents,  all  supported  at 


The  Battle-Ground  of  Democracy    195 

the  expense  of  the  public;  yet  the  people  were 
quite  unaware  that  the  ancient  methods  upon 
which  they  relied  in  order  to  have  an  effective 
participation  in  the  conduct  of  the  government 
and  to  secure  public  officials  responsible  to  them 
and  actively  concerned  to  protect  the  common 
interest  and  promote  the  common  good  were 
rapidly  becoming  mere  shams. 

In  every  department  of  human  affairs  re- 
quiring the  exhibition  of  skill,  the  expert,  sooner 
or  later,  inevitably  becomes  prominent.  There 
was  an  insistent  demand  for  the  expert  of  every 
grade  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest  in  an  under- 
taking involving  so  much  knowledge  of  human 
nature,  such  mastery  of  detail,  so  much  per- 
sistence of  effort,  and  such  adroitness  as  the 
conduct  of  government  by  purchase  under  the 
guise  of  a  government  by  the  people.  In  re- 
sponse to  this  demand  came  the  "Boss, "  the 
expert  who  attended  to  the  infinite  details  and 
complications  of  party  management  and  organi- 
zation and  supplied  the  public  officials — and 
thereby  the  kind  of  government, — the  privilege- 
seeker  desired. 

The  boss  was  a  distinct  advantage  to  the 
class  that  throve  by  government  favors.  His 
real  occupation  was  unknown  to  the  people,  and 
if  at  first  they  did  not  welcome  his  appearance 
they  thought  him  nevertheless  the  natural  and 
perfectly  legitimate  outcome  of  their  accustomed 
political  methods,  a  leader  whom  they  could 


196    Government  of  American  Cities 

displace  when  he  lost  their  approval.  They 
did  not  realize  his  ominous  significance.  Grad- 
ually it  began  to  dawn  upon  them  that  they 
could  neither  select  nor  elect  him ;  that  he  was  not 
a  person,  but  a  system.  The  individual  might 
disappear  or  be  displaced,  but  the  boss  always 
remained.  Not  until  his  sinister  figure  was  ap- 
pearing in  city  after  city  and  state  after  state 
and  even  in  the  United  States  senate,  not  until 
there  was  overwhelming  evidence  of  a  hierarchy 
of  bosses,  big  and  little,  did  there  begin  to  be  a 
general  awakening  of  the  people  to  the  existence 
of  a  system  wholly  mercenary,  reared  upon  the 
greed  for  special  privilege  and  the  sale  of  such 
privilege  by  the  skilful  manipulators  of  the 
political  party-organizations. 

The  issue  has  now  been  fairly  made  up  between 
Special  Privilege  and  Democracy,  between  gov- 
ernment by  purchase  and  government  by  the 
people.  The  contest  will  be  a  long  one.  It  has 
already  taken  many  forms  and  will  assume 
countless  more.  Its  crucial  battles  will  be  in 
the  city,  for  there  the  struggle  between  privilege 
and  the  common  good  is  most  constant  and 
most  intense.  It  is  in  the  city  that  the  victory 
of  the  one  side  or  the  other  will  be  most  far 
reaching  in  its  consequences,  for  nothing  is  more 
certain  than  that  the  overwhelming  majority  of 
the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States  will  be 
city-dwellers.  This  is  already  true  of  the  Eastern 
states.  The  triumph  of  privilege  in  the  city 


The  Battle-Ground  of  Democracy    197 

will  mean,  therefore,  that  the  vast  majority  of 
the  American  people  have  been  made  the  sub- 
jects of  government  by  purchase.  And  it  will 
mean  much  more.  The  increasing  domination 
in  state  after  state  of  the  city  "machines"  over 
the  state  organization  of  political  parties  fore- 
shadows the  outcome  in  state  and  in  nation. 

If  the  fight  of  the  people  to  put  down  govern- 
ment by  purchase  masquerading  in  the  forms  of 
democracy  can  be  won  in  the  city  and  a  govern- 
ment accountable  to  the  people  set  up  in  its 
stead,  democracy  will  triumph  in  state  and  nation. 
If  the  people  lose  their  fight  in  the  city,  they  will 
lose  it  in  state  and  nation.  The  city  is  the 
battle-ground  of  democracy. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

DEMOCRACY  AND  EFFICIENCY 

MUCH  has  been  said  and  written  about  the 
conflict  between  efficiency  and  democracy; 
and  it  is  a  common  assertion  that  the  American 
people  care  more  for  efficiency  than  for  democracy. 
What  is  the  meaning  of  efficiency  as  used  in 
this  assertion?  Does  it  refer  to  the  political 
or  administrative  side  of  governmental  activity? 
If  to  the  latter,  the  experience  of  history  has 
shown  that  under  governments  so  different  as 
the  constitutional  monarchy  of  England,  the 
German  Empire  and  the  republic  of  the 
United  States  the  same  principles  must  be  ap- 
plied if  the  administrative  side  of  government  is 
to  be  efficient.  Whatever  may  be  the  methods 
through  which  the  determination  of  a  govern- 
ment's policy  may  be  made,  the  principles  of 
efficient  administration  remain  the  same.  These 
have  already  been  pointed  out.  It  is  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  keep  the  policy-determining 
functions  of  government  separate  from  the  admin- 
istrative functions  and  to  organize  the  adminis- 
trative service  upon  a  basis  of  individual  fitness 

198 


Democracy  and  Efficiency         199 

not  political  opinion.  No  government,  whatever 
its  form  or  kind,  has,  or  has  had,  an  efficient 
administrative  service  without  applying  these 
basic  principles.  It  is  plain,  therefore,  that  in 
the  performance  of  administrative  functions  there 
can  be  no  conflict  between  efficiency  and  de- 
mocracy as  a  form  of  government. 

If,  then,  there  is  any  conflict  between  democ- 
racy and  efficiency  in  government,  it  must  be  on 
the  policy-determining  side.  And  there  is  no 
doubt  about  the  proper  test  of  the  efficiency  of  a 
government  in  this  respect.  It  is  to  be  measured 
not  by  administrative  success  or  failure — the 
quality  of  the  administrative  service  may  be 
good  or  bad  under  any  form  of  government — 
but  by  the  degree  of  correspondence  of  the  public 
policy  with  the  common  good  of  the  people  affected 
by  it.  The  fundamental  principle  of  democracy 
is  that  governmental  policy  should  be  responsive 
to  the  wishes  of  the  people,  and  therefore  that 
the  officials  who  determine  the  public  policy 
should  be  directly  accountable  to  the  people. 
If  we  may -trust  the  teaching  of  history  or  our 
observation  of  contemporary  politics,  just  to 
the  extent  that  this  fundamental  principle  of 
democracy  is  applied  the  government  is  approved 
by  those  subject  to  it,  and  just  to  the  extent  that 
it  is  not  applied  there  is  popular  unrest.  The 
peaceful  and  successful  solution  of  the  govern- 
mental problem,  at  least  with  the  English  speak- 
ing folk,  lies  in  the  thorough  application  of  the 


200    Government  of  American  Cities 

sound  common-sense  business  principles  upon 
which  success  in  private  business  depends  to 
the  administrative  or  business  side  of  government, 
and  in  applying  to  its  political  or  policy-deter- 
mining side — the  method  is  relatively  unimport- 
ant, the  fact  is  all-important — the  democratic 
principle  that  the  officials  determining  public 
policy  should  be  accountable  to  the  people* 

Unless,  therefore,  they  are  merely  dupes  of  a 
catchy  verbal  antithesis,  those  who  assert  that 
Americans  care  more  for  efficiency  than  democ- 
racy must  mean  that  we  really  think  the  methods 
of  an  aristocratic  or  monarchical  or  imperial  or 
some  form  of  government  in  which  the  policy- 
determining  power  is  not  responsible  to  the 
people  are  preferable  to  democracy.  Exactly 
the  reverse  is  true.  The  American  people  pro- 
foundly believe  in  popular  self-government  and 
are  more  and  more  appreciating  that  the  hin- 
drances to  its  realization  are  outgrown  or  cun- 
ningly perverted  political  machinery  falsely  called 
democratic.  They  are  trying  to  substitute  other 

methods  in  order  that  they  may more ... ..surdy 

control  governmental  action.  There  is  no  con- 
flict between  democracy  and  efficiency.  There 
is  intense  conflict  between  democracy  and  the 
inefficient  political  machinery  it  is  striving  to 
replace. 


The  Municipal  Program  of  the 
National  Municipal  League 


201 


DISCUSSION    OF   THE    MUNICIPAL    PROGRAM    OF   THE 
NATIONAL  MUNICIPAL  LEAGUE 

AT  the  joint  invitation  of  the  City  Club  of 
New  York  and  the  Municipal  League  of 
Philadelphia,  a  Conference  for  Good  City  Govern- 
ment was  held  in  Philadelphia  in  January,  1894. 
Out  of  this  conference  grew  the  National  Municipal 
League,  formally  organized  in  New  York  City  in 
May,  1894.  The  League,  includes  in  its  affiliated 
membership,  the  leading  municipal  reform  or- 
ganizations of  the  country  and,  in  its  associated 
membership,  the  leading  students  of  municipal 
government.  At  the  annual  meeting  of  the 
League  in  1897  held  in  Louisville,  a  special 
committee  was  appointed  "  to  report  on  the  feasi- 
bility of  a  Municipal  Program  which  will  embody 
the  essential  principles  that  must  underlie  success- 
ful municipal  government,  and  which  shall  also 
set  forth  a  working  plan  or  system,  consistent 
with  American  industrial  and  political  conditions, 
for  putting  such  principles  into  practical  opera- 
tion; and  the  Committee,  if  it  finds  such  Mu- 
nicipal Program  to  be  feasible,  is  instructed  to 
report  the  same,  with  its  reasons  therefor,  to  the 
League,  for  consideration." 

203 


204  Municipal  Program 

The  Committee  appointed *  under  this  resolution 
made  a  preliminary  report  at  the  annual  meeting 
of  the  League  held  in  Indianapolis  in  1898,  and 
a  final  one  at  the  annual  meeting  of  the  League 
held  in  Columbus  in  1 899.  The  Committee  did  not 
claim  that  its  report  constituted  the  final  word 
upon  the  subject  referred  to  it,  but  its  members 
were  convinced,  as  a  result  of  their  studies  and 
investigations,  that ' '  A  Municipal  Program  "  which 
would  embody  the  essential  principles  that  must 
underlie  successful  municipal  government  was 
entirely  feasible,  and  they  recommended  certain 
Constitutional  Amendments  and  a  general  Munici- 
pal Corporations  Act,  as  setting  forth  a  working 
plan  or  system  consistent  with  American  industrial 
and  political  conditions,  for  putting  such  principles 
into  practical  operation.  The  committee's  recom- 
mendations were  unanimously  adopted  by  the 
League  at  its  Columbus  meeting. 

The    Municipal    Program2    proposed    by    the 

1  Its  members  were  Horace  E.  Deming,  New  York,  Chair- 
man; George  W.   Guthrie,  Pittsburg;  Frank  J.   Goodnow, 
New  York;  Charles  Richardson,  Philadelphia;  Leo  S.  Rowe, 
Philadelphia;  Albert  Shaw,  New  York;  and  Clinton  Rogers 
Woodruff,  Philadelphia. 

2  The  volumes  containing  the  reports  of  the  Indianapolis 
and  Columbus  meetings  of  the  National  Municipal  League 
and  a  special  volume  issued  by  the  League  in  1900  under  the 
title  "A  Municipal  Program"  and  containing  the  full  text 
of  the  committee's  report  are  now  out  of  print.     For  that 
reason  and  by  arrangement  with  the  League  there  is  now 
published  at  the  end  of  this  volume  a  second  edition  of  the 
Constitutional    Amendments    and    the    General    Municipal 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program    207 

upon  some  lower1  court  recognized  as  a  regularly 
constituted  part  of  the  state's  judicial  system. 
No  one  is  eligible  to  appointment  as  justice 
of  the  city  court  unless  he  has  been  for  at 
least  five  years  a  member  of  the  bar  in  good 
standing.  Such  justices  are  subject  to  the  same 
liabilities,  and  their  judgments  and  proceedings 
are  reviewed  in  the  same  manner  and  to  the 
same  extent  as  is  now  or  may  be  provided  by 
law  in  the  case  of  the  lower  state  court  speci- 
fied. The  justices  of  such  courts  and,  except  as 
otherwise  provided  in  the  constitution,  all  other 
city  judicial  officers  are  appointed  by  the  Mayor, 
and  may  be  removed  by  him  in  the  same  manner 
as  officers  in  the  subordinate  administrative  ser- 
vice of  the  city. i 

The  intent  of  these  provisions  is  to  accomplish 
two  main  purposes:  first,  to  clothe  the  city  govern- 
ment with  such  broad  powers  as  will  enable  it  to 
perform  all  the  appropriate  functions  of  a  local 
government  without  resort  to  the  state  legislature 
for  the  grant  of  additional  power;  and,  secondly, 
to  prevent  the  interference  by  the  state  legislature 
with  the  free  exercise  by  the  city  of  the  govern- 
mental powers  granted  it.  The  mere  grant  of  the 
powers  needed  accomplishes  the  first  of  these 
purposes ;  the  second  is  sought  to  be  accomplished 
by  defining  special  legislation  and  providing  that 
such  legislation  in  order  to  be  valid  must  first 

i  Article  Third,  Section  5  of  Constitutional  Amendments. 
Article  II.,  Section  9  of  Act. 


208  Municipal  Program 

secure  the  favorable  vote  of  two  thirds  of  all  the 
members  of  the  state  legislature  and  then,  unless 
also  approved  by  the  city  legislature,  secure  a  sec- 
ond time  the  affirmative  vote  of  two  thirds  of  all 
the  members  of  the  state  legislature,  which  two 
thirds  must  include  three  fourths  of  the  members 
from  districts  outside  of  the  city  or  cities  affected. 
The  state  legislature,  however,  is  left  entirely 
free  to  enact  general  laws,  i.  e.,  laws  applicable 
either  to  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  state  or  to  all 
the  cities  of  the  state.  Under  these  constitutional 
definitions  the  peculiar  needs  of  an  individual  city 
will  be  met  by  its  own  local  legislative  body,  while 
the  laws  embodying  a  general  state  policy  affecting 
all  cities  will  be  enacted  by  the  state  legislature; 
and,  if  there  should  be  a  case  which  requires  special 
legislation  for  a  city,  such  legislation  will  be  had 
either  upon  the  application  or  with  the  approval 
of  the  city  authorities. 

The  Legislature  is  directed  to  pass  a  general 
Municipal  Corporations  Act  applicable  to  all  the 
cities  in  the  state  which  shall,  by  popular  vote, 
determine  to  adopt  it. 1 

2.     The  relation  of  the  city  government  to  the  state 
government. 

The  portions  of  the  "Municipal  Program"  we 
have  summarized  establish  the  city  as  a  local 
government  and  safeguard  *it  in  the  exercise 

» Article  Third,  Sec.  8,  Const.  Amdt. 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program    209 

of  every  appropriate  local  governmental  function 
while  preserving  to  the  state  its  due  superiority 
in  all  matters  of  general  state  policy.  The 
Program  also  specifically  provides  in  the  Corpora- 
tions Act  that  within  its  corporate  limits  every  city 
shall  be  the  local  agent  of  the  state  government 
f®r  the  enforcement  of  state  laws  except  when 
otherwise  specifically  provided  by  a  general  law 
applicable  to  all  cities  of  the  state  (Art.  II.,  §  16) ; 
and,  further,  that  the  city  shall,  in  the  exercise 
of  the  powers  conferred  by  the  Act,  be  subject  to 
the  supervision  and  control  of  state  administrative 
boards  and  officers  authorized  for  the  purpose 
by  general  laws  applicable  to  all  cities  within  the 
state  (Art.  II.,  §  17). 

3.  The  structural  plan  of  the  city  government; 
and  in  connection  therewith,  the  provisions  in- 
tended to  restrict  and,  as  far  as  possible,  to 
prevent  the  performance  of  the  non»political 
administrative  functions  of  city  government  by 
those  entrusted  with  the  exercise  of  its  political 
functions. 

The  proposed  constitutional  amendments1  re- 
quire that,  in  the  organization  of  every  city, 
provision  shall  be  made  for  a  Council,  whose  mem- 
bers shall  be  elected  by  the  people,  and  for  a 
Mayor  also  elected  by  the  people.  These  are  the 
only  city  officers  elected  by  popular  vote. 

» Article  Third,  Sec.  6,  Const.  Amdt. 
14 


2io  Municipal  Program 

The  Council  a-nd  Mayor.  The  Council,  except  as 
otherwise  provided,  exercises  all  powers  conferred 
upon  the  city  subject  to  the  veto  of  the  Mayor, 
and  if  there  be  a  sufficient  majority  may  override 
his  veto.1  The  Council  has  ample  power  to 
investigate  any  department  of  the  city  government 
and  the  official  acts  and  conduct  of  any  city 
officer.2  All  sessions  of  the  Council  and  of  its 
committees  are  public. 3  The  Council  may  estab- 
lish any  department  or  office  that  it  deems  neces- 
sary or  expedient  for  the  conduct  of  the  city's 
business  or  government.  The  Mayor,  however, 
fills  by  appointment  all  offices  established  by  the 
Council  except  that  the  Council  elects  its  own 
officers.4 

The  Council  consists  of  at  least  nine  and  not 
more  than  fifty  members,  the  precise  number 
being  determined  by  the  local  conditions  of  each 
state.  Members  of  the  Council  are  elected  at 
large  for-  six  years,  one  third  going  out  of  office 
every  two  years.5  The  Mayor  is  the  chief  execu- 
tive officer  of  the  city,  and  appoints  and  removes 
all  heads  of  departments  in  the  administrative 
service  of  the  city,  except  the  head  of  the  Finance 
Department,  who  shall  be  known  as  the  Controller. 
All  persons  in  the  administrative  service  of  the 
city,  except  the  Mayor,  hold  their  offices  without 

1  Article  V.  Sec.  i;  Art.  III.,  Sec.  6,  Act. 

2  Article  V.,  Sec.  9;  Art.  III.,  Sec.  6,  Act. 

3 Article  V.  Sec.  7,  id.        «  Article  V.,  Sec.  8,  id. 
s  Article  V.,  Sec.  2,  id. 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program     211 

fixed  terms.  The  Mayor  is  given  ample  power 
to  investigate  in  person  or  by  agent  into  the 
affairs  of  any  department  of  the  city  government 
and  the  official  acts  and  conduct  of  any  official  in 
the  administrative  service  of  the  city.  For  the 
purpose  of  such  investigation  the  Mayor,  or  his 
agent,  can  compel  the  attendance  and  testimony 
of  witnesses  and  the  production  of  books  and 
papers.  Wilful  false  swearing  in  such  investigation 
is  punishable  as  perjury. 1 

The  Mayor  must  from  time  to  time  make  such 
recommendations  to  the  Council  as  he  may  deem 
to  be  for  the  welfare  of  the  city,  and  he  must  sub- 
mit the  annual  budget  of  current  expenses  to  the 
Council,  which  may  reduce  or  strike  out  (but  may 
not  increase)  any  item. 2 

The  term  of  the  Mayor  is  made  two  years.  3  He 
may  be  removed  by  the  Governor  after  being 
given  opportunity  to  be  heard.  The  proceedings 
upon  such  removal  are  public,  and  a  full  detailed 
statement  of  the  reasons  for  such  removal  are 
filed  by  the  Governor  in  the  office  of  the  Secretary 
of  State,  and  are  made  a  matter  of  public  record. 
The  decision  of  the  Governor  when  filed  with  the 
reasons  therefor  is  final.  The  Governor  may, 
pending  the  investigation,  suspend  the  Mayor 
for  a  period  of  thirty  days.4 

The  City  Controller.- — Under  the  plan  proposed 

1  Article  IV.,  Sec.  17,  Corp.  Act. 

2  Article  III.,  Sec.  7,  id.  *  Article  III.,  Sec.  i,  id. 
*  Article  III.,  Sec.  4,  id. 


212  Municipal  Program 

by  the  National  Municipal  League,  the  general 
control  and  supervision  of  all  the  fiscal  affairs  of 
the  city  will  be  exercised  by  a  city  Controller. 
The  Controller  audits  all  claims  against  the  city, 
is  responsible  for  the  methods  and  the  correctness 
of  the  city's,  bookkeeping,  for  the  completeness 
and  accuracy  of  the  statements  ot  the  city's  finan- 
cial condition,  and  must  make  full  and  detailed 
reports  of  the  city's  financial  transactions.  He 
supervises  the  disbursement  of  city  funds  and 
the  accounts  of  grantees  of  franchises  from  the 
city. 

The  Controller's  is  in  no  sense  a  partisan 
political  office.  His  duties  are  purely  adminis- 
trative and,  therefore,  he  should  not  be  elected  by 
popular  vote. 

It  is  to  him  that  the  citizens  look  to  prevent 
the  misapplication  of  city  revenues  by  any  of  the 
city's  officers,  including  the  Mayor  and  the  May- 
or's appointees.  He  should,  therefore,  not  be 
himself  appointed  by  the  Mayor. 

The  Act  therefore  provides  for  his  election  by 
the  Council,  which  may  also  by  resolution  remove 
him. 1  But  his  term  of  office  is  indefinite  and  the 
successful  performance  of  his ,  duties  requires  so 
high  an  order  of  skill  and  technical  training  that 
the  impartial  and  efficient  conduct  of  his  office 
should  assure  that  such  a  resolution  would  be  of 
rare  occurrence.  The  temporary  tenures  and  the 
shifting  personalities  of  thei1*  fiscal  officers  have 

J  Article  VI.,  id. 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program    217 

ment  of  the  city  government,  the  voters  will  not 
be  confused  by  the  multitude  of  offices  to  be  filled. 

4.     The  methods  of  filling  elective  city  offices. 

The  proposed  Constitutional  Amendments1  re- 
quire the  enactment  of  laws  providing  for  the  ascer- 
tainment by  proper  proof  of  the  citizens  entitled 
to  vote,  for  the  personal  registration  of  voters 
and  for  absolute  secrecy  in  voting.  The  election  of 
city  officers  is  required  to  be  at  a  different  date 
from  that  of  any  election  of  officers  of  the  state 
or  national  government. 

With  candidates  for  only  two  offices  to  be  voted 
for,  Mayor  and  members  of  the  Council,  the 
election  methods  can  be  made  very  simple.  Nomi- 
nations of  elective  city  officers  are  by  petition 
signed  by  qualified  voters  of  the  city.  The  Council 
may  determine  the  number  of  signatures,  but  not 
more  than  fifty  signatures  shall  be  required.  The 
petition  must  be  filed  in  the  Mayor's  office  at 
least  thirty  days  prior  to  the  date  of  the  election, 
except  in  the  case  of  the  death  or  withdrawal  of  a 
candidate.  The  voter  must  vote  separately  for 
each  candidate  for  whom  he  desires  to  vote.  If 
the  election  is  by  ballot,  the  Council  may  determine 
the  form  of  the  ballot,  but  the  names  of  all  candi- 
dates for  the  same  city  office  must  be  printed  upon 
the  ballot  in  alphabetical  order  under  the  title 
of  the  office.2  The  nominating  petitions  need 

1  Article  First,  Const.  Amdt. 

2  Article  First,  Const.  Amdt.,  Sec.  3;  Art.  VII.,  Sec.  2,  Act. 


218  Municipal  Program 

not  be  one  paper  and  may  be  written  or  printed, 
but  the  signatures  thereto  must  be  the  genuine 
autographs  of  the  persons  whose  names  purport 
to  be  signed.  The  house  address  of  the  signer  must 
be  added  and  the  signature  must  be  made  and  ac- 
knowledged or  proved  before  an  officer  authorized 
to  take  acknowledgments  and  proof  of  deeds. 
The  certificate  of  the  officer  is  sufficient  proof  of  the 
genuineness  of  the  signature  for  the  purpose  of  the 
petition,  but  signing  another's  name  or  a  false 
or  fictitious  name,  or  signing  a  certificate  falsely 
stating  that  a  signature  was  made  in  the  presence 
of  the  officer  or  acknowledged  or  proved  before 
him,  is  made  a  felony. 1 

ADDITIONAL   FEATURES. 

There  are  a  number  of  other  important  features 
of  the  Municipal  Program  to  which  attention 
should  be  called. 

Initiative,  Referendum,  Recall,  Proportional  Repre- 
sentation. 

V       j-J 

Under  Article  Third,  Section  7,  of  the  proposed 
Constitutional  Amendments,  a  city  may  adopt 
the  initiative,  the  referendum,  and  the  recall. 2 
The  power  to  establish  direct  legislation  and  mi- 
nority or  proportional  or  other  method  of  repre- 
sentation is  specifically  conferred  by  Section  3  of 

»  Article  Fifth.,  Const.  Amdt.;  Art.  VII.,  Sec.  4,  Act. 
2  See  also  Article  Fourth,  Const.  Amdt. 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program    219 

the  same  article.  These  may  be  established 
in  any  city  by  the  Council  with  the  consent  of  the 
majority  of  the  qualified  voters  of  the  city. 
On  a  petition  therefor  signed  by  two  per  cent, 
of  the  qualified  voters  of  the  city  (there  must  be 
not  less  than  one  thousand  signers),  the  Council 
must  submit  to  popular  vote  at  the  next  ensuing 
election  a  proposition  to  establish  the  initiative, 
the  referendum,  minority  or  proportional  or  other 
method  of  representation. 

Actions  by  citizens. 

Under  the  provisions  of  the  Municipal  Program 
any  citizen  who  is  a  householder  of  the  city- — upon 
giving,  if  required  by  the  court,  security  to  in- 
demnify the  city  against  costs* — may  maintain  an 
action  in  the  name  of  the  city  to  restrain  the  ex- 
ecution of  any  illegal,  unauthorized,  or  fraudulent 
contract  on  behalf  of  the  city ;  or  the  payment  of 
any  illegal,  unauthorized,  or  fraudulent  claims 
against  the  city ;  or  to  compel  the  refunding  of  any 
illegal,  unauthorized,  or  fraudulent  payment  on 
behalf  of  the  city  (Art.  VII.,  Sec.  i,  Act). 

Franchises. 

The  Municipal  Program  has  laid  down  certain 
fundamental  principles  to  be  observed  in  dealing 
with  grants  to  individuals  or  corporations  to 
perform  such  public  services  as  the  furnishing  of 
light,  power,  water,  transit,  to  the  city  or  its 
inhabitants. 


220  Municipal  Program 

The  city  is  given  power  to  decide  for  itself,  as 
fully  and  as  freely  as  the  state  now  decides,  all 
questions  in  regard  to  the  performance  of  such 
public  services.1  Whether  and  to  what  extent 
the  city  should  itself  render  such  services,  or  any 
of  them,  or  should  grant  the  right  to  others,  is 
left  for  local  determination.  The  city  is  thus 
placed  in  a  position  where  it  is  not  obliged  to  go 
without  electric  light,  for  instance,  unless  it  will 
submit  to  such  terms  as  a  private  corporation 
may  see  fit  to  impose  in  the  absence  of  any  real 
competition.  This  is  the  first  fundamental  prin- 
ciple. The  city  is  made  free  to  decide  its  policy 
without  resort  to  any  outside  authority. 

In  the  second  place,2  the  rights  of  every  city  in 
and  to  its  water  front,  ferries,  wharf  property, 
land  under  water,  public  landings,  wharves, 
docks,  streets,  avenues,  parks,  bridges,  and  all 
other  public  places,  are  declared  to  be  inalienable, 
except  by  a  four-fifths  vote  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  the  Council  approved  by  the  Mayor;  and 
no  franchise,  lease,  or  right  to  use  the  same,  either 
on,  through,  across,  under,  or  over  them,  and  no 
other  franchise  granted  by  a  city,  to  any  private 
corporation,  association,  or  individual,  shall  be 
for  a  longer  period  than  twenty-one  years. 

In  the  third  place,2  such  grant  and  any  contract 
in  pursuance  thereof  may  provide  that  upon  the 

1  Art.  Third,  Sec.  7,  Const.  Amdt.;  Art.  II,  Sees,  i  and  10, 
Act. 

2  Art.  Third,  Sec.  i,  Const.  Amdt.;  Art.  II.,  Sec.  10,  Act. 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program    221 

termination  of  the  grant,  the  plant,  as  well  as  the 
property,  if  any,  of  the  grantee  in  the  streets, 
avenues,  and  other  public  places  shall  thereupon 
without  further  or  other  compensation  to  the 
grantee,  or  upon  the  payment  of  a  fair  valuation 
thereof,  be  and  become  the  property  of  the  city; 
but  the  grantee  shall  be  entitled  to  no  payment 
because  of  any  valuation  derived  from  the  fran- 
chise. Every  grant  shall  specify  the  mode  of 
determining  any  valuation  therein  provided  for, 
and  shall  make  adequate  provision  by  way  of 
forfeiture  of  the  grant,  or  otherwise,  to  secure 
efficiency  of  public  service  at  reasonable  rates,  and 
for  the  maintenance  of  the  property  in  good  order 
throughout  the  term  of  the  grant. 

In  the  fourth  place,1  every  grantee  of  such 
franchises  or  rights  to  use  shall  keep  books  of 
accounts  and  make  stated  quarterly  reports  in 
writing  to  the  city  Controller.  The  books  must 
be  kept  and  the  reports  made  in  accordance 
with  forms  and  methods  prescribed  by  him, 
which,  so  far  as  practicable,  shall  be  uniform 
for  all  such  grantees.  The  Controller  may  in- 
spect and  examine,  or  cause  to  be  inspected 
or  examined,  at  all  reasonable  hours,  the  books 
of  account  of  the  grantee.  The  reports  must 
contain  an  accurate  statement,  in  summarized 
form  and  also  in  detail,  of  all  financial  receipts 
from  all  sources,  and  all  expenditures  for  all 

*Art.  Third,  Sec.  i,  Const.  Amdt.;  Art.  II.,  Sec.  10,  Act, 


222  Municipal  Program 

purposes,  together  with  a  full  statement  of  assets 
and  debts  and  such  other  information  as  to  the 
financial  condition  of  the  grantee  as  the  Controller 
may  require.  These  reports  are  public  docu- 
ments.J  The  Controller  is  required  to  keep  a 
separate  record  for  each  grantee  showing: 

1.  The  true  and  entire  cost  of  construction,  of 
equipment,  of  maintenance,  and  of  the  adminis- 
tration and   operation  thereof;   the   amount   of 
stock  issued,  if  any;  the  amount  of  cash  paid  in, 
the  number  and  par  value  of  shares,  the  amount  and 
character  of  indebtedness,  if  any,  the  rate  of  taxes, 
the  dividends  declared,  the  character  and  amount 
of  all  fixed  charges,  the  allowance,  if  any,  for 
interest,  for  wear  and  tear  or  depreciation,  all 
amounts  and  sources  of  income ; 

2.  The  amount  collected  annually  from  the 
city  treasury  and  the  character  and  extent  of  the 
service  rendered  therefor  to  the  city ; 

3.  The  amount  collected  annually  from  other 
users  of  the  service  and  the  character  and  extent 
of  the  service  rendered  therefor  to  them.     Such 
books  of  record  shall  be  open  to  public  examina- 
tion at  any  time  during  the  business  hours  of 
the  Controller's  office. 2 

The  city's  power  to  incur  indebtedness. 

It  is  usual  in  the  United  States  to  limit  the 
power  of  a  city  to  incur  indebtedness  to  a  given 

)  Art,  II.,  Sec.  10,  Act,  2  Art.  VI.,  id. 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program     223 

percentage  of  the  assessed  valuation  of  taxable 
real  estate  within  the  corporate  limits.  The 
Municipal  Program  retains  this  principle  as  to  all 
debts  incurred  by  the  city  for  any  purpose  or 
undertaking  which  is  not  completely  self-support- 
ing. But  it  makes  a  distinction  between  such 
debts  and  a  debt  incurred  to  supply  the  city 
with  water,  for  example,  or  for  any  other  specific 
undertaking  from  which  is  derived  a  revenue 
sufficient  to  make  the  enterprise  completely  self- 
sustaining  and  to  amortize  the  principal  of  the 
debt  at  or  before  its  maturity.  The  framers  of  the 
Municipal  Program  recommend  that  bonds  issued 
to  establish  completely  self-sustaining  enter- 
prises should  not  be  included  within  the  city's 
debt  limit. 

New  York  City's  experience  has  furnished 
convincing  proof  of  the  soundness  of  the  recom- 
mendation. The  income  from  the  users  of  the 
city  water  has  been  more  than  enough  to  pay 
the  interest  charges,  amortize  the  principal  of  the 
debt,  and  meet  the  expenses  of  maintenance  and 
operation,  besides  making  ample  provision  for 
replacement  of  the  plant.  The  resources  of  the 
city  have  not  been  diminished,  they  have  been 
increased  by  the  ownership  and  operation  of  the 
water- works.  Yet  in  the  determination  of  the 
city's  debt  limit  the  water  bonds  were  until  recently 
placed  upon  precisely  the  same  footing  with  bonds 
necessarily  paid,  principal  and  interest,  from  the 
proceeds  of  taxation.  The  city  has  been  in  the 


224  Municipal  Program 

same  situation  as  to  the  bonds  issued  to  build 
subways  for  rapid  transit.  In  this  instance  the 
city  retained  the  ownership  of  the  roads  and 
contracted  for  the  construction  and  operation. 
The  performance  of  the  contract  is  amply  secured. 
At  the  termination  of  the  contract  the  bonds  will 
have  been  paid  in  full  and  meantime  not  a  penny 
of  expense  for  interest  or  for  the  maintenance  or 
operation  of  the  subway  will  have  come  from  the 
pockets  of  the  city  taxpayer.  The  Financial 
Department  has  long  represented  that  the  entire 
expense  of  improving  the  city's  docks  is  more  than 
met  by  the  revenues  received  from  their  users. 
These  instances  are  sufficient  to  show  that  city 
bonds  issued  for  improvements  necessarily  paid 
from  the  proceeds  of  taxation  and  those  issued  for 
improvements  which  cost  the  taxpayer  nothing 
do  not  properly  belong  in  the  same  category. 
Under  proper  safeguards,  bonds  of  the  latter  class 
should  be  excluded  in  determining  the  limitation 
of  a  city's  power  to  incur  indebtedness. 

The  provisions  of  the  Municipal  Program1  in 
this  respect  are  the  following: 

The  bonds  issued  for  such  an  undertaking  must 
be  authorized  by  the  affirmative  vote  of  two  thirds 
of  the  Council  and  approved  by  the  Mayor  and  by 
the  affirmative  vote  of  the  majority  of  the  qualified 
voters  of  the  city  voting  upon  the  question  of 
their  issuance  at  the  next  ensuing  election.  From 
and  after  a  period  to  be  determined  by  the  Council, 

i  Art.  Third,  Sec.  2  (2),  Const.  Amdt. 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program    225 

not  exceeding  five  years  from  the  date  of  such 
election,  whenever  and  for  so  long  as  such  an 
undertaking  fails  to  produce  sufficient  revenue 
to  pay  all  costs  of  operation  and  administration 
(including  interest  on  the  city's  bonds  issued 
therefor  and  the  cost  of  insurance  against  losses 
by  fire,  accidents,  and  injuries  to  persons)  and  an 
annual  amount  sufficient  to  pay  at  or  before 
maturity  all  bonds  issued  on  account  of  said 
undertaking,  all  such  bonds  outstanding  shall  be 
included  in  determining  the  limitation  of  the  city's 
power  to  incur  indebtedness,  unless  the  principal 
and  interest  thereof  be  payable  exclusively  from 
the  receipts  of  such  undertaking.  The  City  Con- 
troller shall  annually  report  to  the  Council  in 
detail  the  amount  of  the  revenue  from  each  such 
undertaking  and  whether  there  is  any  and,  if  so, 
what  deficit  in  meeting  the  requirements  above 
set  forth. 

Provision  shall  be  made  at  the  time  of  their 
issue  for  raising  a  sum  of  money  by  taxation 
sufficient  to  pay,  as  it  falls  due,  the  interest 
upon  all  city  bonds  not  exclusively  payable  from 
the  receipts  of  revenue-producing  undertakings, 
and  to  pay  and  discharge  the  principal  thereof 

within years  from  the  date  of  their  issue;  but 

whenever  in  any  year  the  receipts  from  any  re  venue- 
producing  undertaking  shall  be  sufficient  to  pay 
the  costs  of  operation  and  administration  as  above 
defined,  and  the  annual  amount  hereinbefore 
required,  the  tax  to  pay  the  interest  and  provide 
for  the  principal  of  the  bonds  issued  for  such 
undertaking  shall  not  be  collected,  and  the  same 
shall  be  paid  from  such  receipts.1 

«  Recent  amendments  to  the  New  York  constitution  exempt 
from  the  constitutional  debt  limit  New  York  City  water  bonds 


226  Municipal  Program 

Municipal  Accounts. 

The  Municipal  Program  does  not  attempt  to 
prescribe  in  detail  just  what  the  city's  books  of 
account  should  contain  nor  how  they  should  be 

issued  after  January  i,  1904,  and  the  water  bonds  of  cities 
of  the  second  class  issued  after  January  i,  1908.  A  similar 
amendment  is  pending  relating  to  water  bonds  of  cities 
of  the  third  class.  The  New  York  legislature  at  its  session 
in  1908  passed  the  following  proposed  amendment  to  the 
state  constitution:  "...  any  debt  hereafter  incurred  by 
the  City  of  New  York  for  a  public  improvement  owned  or  to  be 
owned  by  the  city,  which  yields  to  the  city  current  net  revenue 
after  making  any  necessary  allowance  for  repairs  and  main- 
tenance for  which  the  city  is  liable,  in  excess  of  the  interest 
on  said  debt  and  of  the  annual  instalments  necessary  for  its 
amortization,  may  be  excluded  in  ascertaining  the  power  of 
said  city  to  become  otherwise  indebted,  provided  that  a 
sinking  fund  for  its  amortization  shall  have  been  established 
and  maintained  and  that  the  indebtedness  shall  not  be  so  ex- 
cluded during  any  period  of  time  when  the  revenue  aforesaid 
shall  not  be  sufficient  to  equal  the  said  interest  and  amortiza- 
tion instalments,  .  .  .  any  indebtedness  heretofore  incurred  by 
the  City  of  New  York  for  any  rapid  transit  or  dock  investment 
may  be  so  excluded  proportionately  to  the  extent  to  which 
the  current  net  revenue  received  by  said  city  therefrom  shall 
meet  the  interest  and  amortization  instalments  thereof, 
provided  that  any  increase  in  the  debt  incurring  power  of  the 
City  of  New  York  which  shall  result  from  the  exclusion  of 
debts  heretofore  incurred  shall  be  available  only  for  the  acquisi- 
tion or  construction  of  properties  to  be  used  for  rapid  transit 
or  dock  purposes.  The  legislature  shall  prescribe  the  method 
by  which  and  the  terms  and  conditions  under  which  the 
amount  of  any  debt  to  be  so  excluded  shall  be  determined, 
and  no  such  debt  shall  be  excluded  except  in  accordance  with 
the  determination  so  prescribed.  The  legislature  may  in  its 
discretion  confer  appropriate  jurisdiction  on  the  appellate 
division  of  the  supreme  court  in  the  first  judicial  department 
for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  amount  of  any  debt 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program    227 

kept,  but  it  sets  forth  the  fundamental  princi- 
ples which,  if  intelligently  applied,  would  enable 
the  financial  condition  of  the  city's  government 
and  the  quality  of  the  administration  of  the  city's 
public  business  to  be  as  thoroughly  known  and  as 
accurately  tested  as  are  the  financial  condition 
and  business  administration  of  any  well  managed 
large  private  corporation. 

All  the  cities  of  the  state  are  required  by  Art- 
icle Third,  Sec.  4,  of  the  proposed  constitutional 
amendments  to  make  stated  annual  reports  to  the 
state  fiscal  officer  in  accordance  with  forms  and 
methods  prescribed  by  him,  which  must  be  uni- 
form for  all  cities.  These  reports  are  printed 
as  public  documents  and  must  disclose  fully, 
and  in  both  summarized  form  and  in  detail: 

i.  The  receipts  from  all  sources  and  expendi- 
tures for  all  purposes ; 

to  be  so  excluded.  No  indebtedness  of  a  city  valid  at  the 
time  of  its  inception  shall  thereafter  become  invalid  by  reason 
of  the  operation  of  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  section." 

Article  VIII.,  Section  24,  of  the  Michigan  constitution 
adopted  in  1 908  reads :  "  When  a  city  or  village  is  authorized 
to  acquire  or  operate  any  public  utility,  it  may  issue  mortgage 
bonds  therefor  beyond  the  general  limit  of  bonded  indebted- 
ness prescribed  by  law :  Provided,  That  such  mortgage  bonds 
issued  beyond  the  general  limit  of  bonded  indebtedness  pre- 
scribed by  law  shall  not  impose  any  liability  upon  such  city 
or  village,  but  shall  be  secured  only  upon  the  property  and 
revenues  of  such  public  utility,  including  a  franchise  stating 
the  terms  upon  which,  in  case  of  foreclosure,  the  purchaser 
may  operate  the  same,  which  franchise  shall  in  no  case  extend 
for  a  longer  period  than  twenty  years  from  the  date  of  the  sale 
of  such  utility  and  franchise  on  foreclosure," 


*  J 


228  Municipal  Program 

2.  The  city's  indebtedness  and  the  purposes 
for  which  the  debt  has  been  incurred ;  and 

3.  Such  other  information  as  the  state  fiscal 
officer    may   ask   for.     Thus,    whatever   be   the 
method  of  bookkeeping  in  an  individual  city,  the 
statements  in  its  annual  report  will  be  comparable 
with  the  report  from  every  other  city  in  the  state. 

The  state  fiscal  officer  is  also  clothed  with  full 
authority  to  make  or  cause  to  be  made  at  any 
time  a  thorough  investigation  into  the  financial 
administration  of  any  city  government  and  the 
report  of  his  investigation  is  a  public  document. 
Article  II.,  Sec.  15,  of  the  proposed  Municipal 
Corporations  Act  repeats  these  constitutional 
provisions,  and  under  Article  II.,  Sec.  17,  of  the 
Act  the  state  financial  department  may  exercise 
a  general  supervision  over  the  city's  methods  of 
keeping  accounts.  Article  VI.  of  the  Act  provides 
that  the  City  Controller  shall  have  a  general 
supervision  and  control  of  all  the  fiscal  affairs  of 
the  city,  to  be  exercised  in  the  manner  which  may 
be  by  ordinance  prescribed .  Thus  full  opportunity 
is  given  for  the  development  of  a  system  of  city 
bookkeeping,  accounting,  and  reporting  which  will 
make  the  experience  of  each  city  available  to 
every  other. 

No  time  need  be  spent  in  describing  the  system 
or  rather  lack  of  system  which  has  hitherto  pre- 
vailed in  city  accounting  methods.  Neither  the 
city's  financial  department  nor  the  citizen  has 
been  able  to  learn  the  city's  financial  condition 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program    229 

with  accuracy  or  to  form  an  intelligent  judgment 
of  the  quality  of  services  rendered  or  of  the  results 
accomplished  for  the  expenditure  of  the  public 
money.  Yet  these  are  the  main  purposes  of  a 
city's  financial  accounts  and  reports.  During  the 
past  decade  the  importance  of  municipal  accounts 
— or  rather  of  municipal  accounting,  for  much 
more  than  bookkeeping  is  involved* — has  been 
coming  into  greater  and  greater  prominence. 
The  National  Municipal  League  was  the  first 
organization  to  take  up  the  matter  systematically. 
It  appointed  a  committee  on  the  subject  in  1900 
and  the  investigations  and  recommendations  of 
that  committee  have  been  the  initiative  of  a 
movement  which  has  now  gained  such  momentum 
that  the  entire  practicability  of  establishing 
methods  of  accounting  that  will  enable  both 
the  citizen  and  those  charged  with  the  conduct  of 
city  administration  to  know  what  return  is  received 
for  the  expenditure  of  the  public  money  is  no 
longer  doubted.  Since  1900  nearly  a  hundred 
different  cities  have  demonstrated  that  better 
accounting  leads  to  a  more  intelligent  and  more 
economical  city  administration,1  and  adds  greatly 
to  its  efficiency. 

One  need  not  be  a  professional  accountant  in 
order  to  state  some  of  the  matters  which  would 
seem  to  be  essential  to  any  system  of  city  accounts 

i  The  Bureau  of  the  Census  has  for  some  years  been  doing 
effective  work  in  promoting  better  methods  of  municipal 
accounting. 


230  Municipal  Program 

that  will  enable  the  citizen  to  obtain  the  infor- 
mation to  which  he  is  entitled  when  he  examines 
the  financial  reports  of  a  city. 

Current  revenues  and  expenses. — There  should 
be  a  complete  record  of  all  current  revenue  as  it 
accrues,  whether  actually  collected  or  not;  for 
example,  taxes,  licenses,  rents,  concessions,  fran- 
chises, etc.,  whether  actually  received  in  cash 
or  not.  Against  these  should  be  placed  all  current 
expenses,  whether  actually  paid  or  incurred  and 
not  yet  paid;  for  example,  salaries,  wages,  rent, 
interest,  purchases  of  materials  and  supplies. 
These  two  accounts  would  show  the  city's  current 
earnings  and  expenses  during  any  fiscal  period 
reported  upon. 

Current  assets  and  liabilities. — There  should  also 
be  set  forth  the  cash  and  other  current  assets  in 
hand,  including  all  uncollected  revenues  and 
accounts  receivable  and  all  outstanding  obliga- 
tions of  the  city  except  its  funded  debt.  These 
two  accounts  would  enable  one  to  know  the  city's 
current  assets  and  liabilities  at  any  given  date, 
for  example,  at  the  close  of  the  period  reported 
upon. 

Cash  receipts  and  disbursements. — The  city's 
cash  receipts  during  the  period  reported  upon,  in- 
cluding receipts  from  current  borrowing  (but  again 
omitting  the  funded  debt),  and  its  cash  disburse- 
ments should  be  set  forth.  These  would  explain 
the  current  cash  balance  reported  in  the  statement 
of  current  assets  and  give  information  as  to  the 
character  and  the  amount  of  the  revenues  and 
other  accounts  receivable  collected  and  of  the 
expenses  and  current  liabilities  paid  during  the 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program     231 

period  covered  by  the  report.  Cash  received 
during  the  period  but  which  should  have  been 
received  prior  thereto,  and  cash  paid  during  the 
period  to  discharge  obligations  incurred  prior 
thereto,  should  be  separately  set  up  in  these  two 
accounts. 

A  report  containing  the  foregoing  accounts 
would  enable  the  citizen  to  know  the  city's  current 
revenues  and  expenses,  its  current  assets  and 
liabilities,  and  its  actual  cash  receipts  and  cash 
expenditures.  He  could  understand  the  current 
operating  transactions  of  the  city  and  the  status 
of  its  current  credit. 

Appropriations,  current  borrowings.— Since  city 
officers  may  lawfully  neither  spend  the  city's 
money  nor  incur  obligations  on  behalf  of  the  city 
except  pursuant  to  a  duly  conferred  authority, 
there  should  also  be  accounts  showing 

1.  The    appropriations   or  authorizations    to 
spend  and  incur  liabilities  on  current  account  as 
against  the  current  revenue  provisions  for  meeting 
them; 

2.  The  authorizations  to  borrow  and  to  spend 
and  incur  liabilities  against  current  borrowings ; 

3 .  The  receipts  and  disbursements  from  current 
borrowings. 

These  accounts  would  inform  the  citizen  as  to 
the  city  budget  and  current  bond  transactions. 

Capital  account. — There  should  also  be  a  distinct 
and  separate  account  kept  of  the  various  proper- 
ties owned  by  a  city  and  the  obligations  incurred 


232  Municipal  Program 

therefor,  and  of  its  permanent  funds.  This  might 
be  called  the  city's  capital  account.  The  capital 
assets  would  consist  of  such  things  as  its  sinking 
fund,  permanent  improvement  funds,  real  estate, 
industrial  properties  and  their  equipments,  e.g., 
water-works,  markets,  bridges.  The  city's  capital 
liabilities  would  be  its  funded  debt  and  its  capital- 
ized surplus,  if  any.  This  account  would  also  be 
supplemented  by  a  statement  of  receipts  and 
disbursements.  The  receipts  would  be,  for  ex- 
ample, the  amounts  realized  on  flotation  of  the 
city's  bonds,  or  on  sale  of  its  water- works  or  any 
other  property;  the  disbursements  would  be  such 
matters  as  payments  on  account  of  construction, 
or  the  purchase  of  property,  or  payments  on 
account  of  its  funded  debt. 

Cost  of  administration  and  degree  of  adminis- 
trative efficiency.- — A  system  of  city  accounts  which 
gave  the  foregoing  information  would  present  the 
various  aspects  of  the  administration  of  the  city 
as  a  proprietor.  By  supplementing  these  with 
classified  schedules  and  exhibits  of  details,  the 
cost  of  administration  and  the  degree  of  admin- 
istrative efficiency  would  no  longer  be  practically 
unknown  quantities. 

The  reports  of  the  chief  fiscal  officer  of  a  city, 
based  on  such  a  system  of  accounting,  could  pre- 
sent in  clear  and  intelligible  form  to  every  citizen 
the  precise  information  which  he  desires  to  know 
in  order  to  form  a  judgment  upon  the  financial 
conduct  of  any  part  of  the  city's  business  and  upon 
the  results  as  a  whole. 

Trust  accounts. — One  topic  remains  to  be  con- 
sidered. A  city  government  is  very  often  made 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program     233 

a  trustee  of  property  which  is  to  be  devoted  to 
the  interest  of  the  community.  Each  such  trust 
has  its  own  special  conditions  and  their  non- 
observance  may  make  the  city  liable.  Familiar 
examples  are  the  gift  of  funds  to  a  muni- 
cipal corporation  to  be  used  for  the  purposes  of  a 
library,  moneys  received  as  security,  and  deposits 
on  contracts  and  bids.  There  should  be  a  sepa- 
rate account  of  every  such  trust,  setting  forth 
earnings,  expenses,  assets,  liabilities,  receipts,  and 
disbursements. 

Cities  having  a  population  of  twenty-five  thousand 
may  frame  their  own  charters. 

Any  city  having  a  population  of  twenty-five 
thousand  or  more  may,  subject  to  the  constitution 
and  to  the  general  laws  of  the  state  and  to  the 
special  laws  as  above  defined,1  adopt  its  own 
charter  and  frame  of  government.  A  simple 
method  is  provided  for  electing  a  charter  con- 
vention to  prepare  such  a  charter  and  frame  of 
government,  which,  if  ratified  by  the  city's  voters, 
supersedes  all  laws  inconsistent  therewith  and 
any  existing  charter  and  all  amendments  thereof. 
A  method  of  making  amendments  to  the  charter 
is  also  provided. 2 

These  "home-made  charters,"  as  they  are 
sometimes  called,  are  permitted  now  in  several  of 

1  See  p.  206  ante. 

2  Articles  Fourth  and  Fifth,  Const.  Amdt. 


234  Municipal  Program 

our  states, *  and  their  superiority  over  the  special 
charters  which  were  the  products  of  state  legis- 
lative effort  has  been  abundantly  established 
by  experience. 

SUMMARY. 
The  City  under  the  Municipal  Program. 

The  city's  independence  is  guaranteed.  The 
state  legislature  cannot  meddle  with  purely  local 
affairs.  Its  functions,  so  far  as  cities  are  concerned, 
are  confined  to  passing  laws  applicable  to  all  cities 
or  all  inhabitants  of  the  state ;  unless  the  necessity 
or  propriety  of  legislative  action  in  the  case  of  a 
particular  city  is  so  clear  that  a  special  law  receives 
the  affirmative  vote  of  two  thirds  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  state  legislature  and  is  formally 
approved  by  the  council  of  the  city,  or  if  disap- 
proved, is  within  thirty  days  after  such  disapproval 
again  passed  by  a  two-thirds  vote,  which  must 
include  three  fourths  of  the  members  from  dis- 
tricts outside  of  the  city  concerned. 

The  city  must  manage  its  own  affairs.  No  out- 
side authority  can  interfere  with  it. 

The  city  is  vested  with  ample  power.  It  may 
acquire,  hold,  manage,  and  control  property ;  with- 
in its  corporate  limits  it  has  the  same  powers  of  tax- 
ation as  are  possessed  by  the  state ;  it  may  license 
and  regulate  all  trades,  occupations,  and  businesses  • 
it  is  vested  with  power  to  perform  and  render  all 

»  See  pp.  91-7  ante. 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program  235 

public  services,  and  with  all  powers  of  government, 
subject  to  the  state  constitution,  and  to  laws  applic- 
able to  all  cities  of  the  state  or  to  all  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  state.  It  may  establish  minor  courts 
for  the  enforcement  of  its  ordinances.  The  city, 
not  the  state  legislature,  controls  the  granting  of 
public  franchises  within  the  city's  limits.  It 
may  incur  indebtedness  up  to  a  certain  percentage 
upon  the  assessed  valuation  of  the  real  estate 
within  its  limits,  but  debt  incurred  for  self-support- 
ing undertakings,  which  also  take  care  of  the  cur- 
rent interest  and  of  the  principal  of  the  debt  at 
maturity,  are  not  included  in  the  constitutional 
limitation. 

Contrast  this  ample  grant  of  powers  with  the 
helpless  condition  of  a  city  which  may  not  even 
control  its  street  franchises  or  the  paving  of  its 
streets. 

The  business  function  of  administration  and  the 
purely  political  function  of  determining  the  pub- 
lic policy  to  be  administered  are  intrusted  to  en- 
tirely separate  agencies.  The  former  is  given 
wholly  to  the  Mayor  and  to  his  appointees,  who 
hold  office  without  fixed  terms.  The  members 
of  the  subordinate  administrative  service  must  be 
appointed  and  promoted  upon  the  merit  principle. 
Prompt  dismissal  from  the  service  follows  failure 
to  perform  their  duties. 

All  purely  political  functions  are  performed  by 
the  Council,  subject  to  the  limited  veto  power  of 
the  Mayor. 


236  Municipal  Program 

The  Council  is  the  local  legislature  elected  by 
popular  vote  on  a  general  ticket  from  the  city  at 
large,  one  third  of  the  Council  being  elected  at 
each  city  election. 

There  are  no  gerrymandered  election  districts. 
The  Council  has  no  patronage  to  dispense.  Its 
membership  is  reasonably  permanent,  and  a  con- 
tinuous public  policy  in  important  city  matters  is 
made  possible.  The  Council  may  establish  any 
office  necessary  or  expedient  for  the  conduct 
of  the  city  business  or  government  and  may  fix 
its  salary  and  duties.  It  has  absolute  initiative 
in  all  public  matters  except  as  to  the  annual  budget 
of  current  expenses,  which  must  be  submitted 
by  the  Mayor.  Any  item  in  the  budget  may  be 
reduced  or  omitted  by  the  Council,  but  it  cannot 
be  increased.  The  Council  is  the  grand  committee 
of  the  citizens  chosen  by  them  for  the  purpose  of 
determining  and  regulating  all  questions  of  city 
policy.  It  chooses  the  City  Controller,  who  holds 
office  without  fixed  term,  and  is  the  city's  chief 
financial  officer,  with  most  important  functions. 

The  Council,  if  its  action  is  ratified  by  the  citi- 
zens, may  establish  a  method  of  direct  legislation, 
so  that  the  voters  may  submit,  and  a  majority 
thereof  voting  thereon  may  decide  by  direct  vote 
upon  propositions  relative  to  city  matters.  In  like 
manner  minority  or  proportional  or  other  method 
of  representation  as  to  elections  to  elective  city 
offices  may  be  established.  On  a  duly  authenti- 
cated petition  therefor,  the  questions  whether  di- 


Discussion  of  Municipal  Program     237 

rect  legislation,  or  minority,  proportional,  or  other 
method  of  representation,  shall  be  established 
must  be  submitted  to  the  voters  for  decision, 
without  previous  favorable  action  by  the  Council. 
Under  the  broad  powers  granted  it,  any  city  may 
establish  the  initiative,  the  referendum,  and  the 
recall.  The  citizens  of  a  city  having  a  population 
of  twenty-five  thousand  or  more  may,  through 
a  local  charter  convention  elected  by  themselves, 
if  its  action  is  ratified  by  them,  have  a  charter 
and  frame  of  government  of  their  own  devising, 
subject  alone  to  the  fundamental  provisions  of 
the  state  constitution. 

The  members  of  the  Council  and  the  Mayor  are 
the  only  city  officials  elected  by  popular  vote,  and 
their  election  must  occur  at  a  different  date  from 
state  or  national  elections.  The  registration  of 
voters,  the  absolute  secrecy  of  the  act  of  voting 
are  guaranteed.  Nominations  for  Mayor  and  for 
members  of  the  Council  must  be  made  by  pe- 
tition, and  the  voter  must  vote  separately  for 
each  candidate  for  whom  he  desires  to  vote. 
The  ballot  will  be  simple.  The  voter  will  not, 
confused  by  the  multiplicity  of  offices  and  can- 
didates, be  forced  to  rely  upon  the  guidance  of 
the  managers  of  his  political  party.  He  votes 
separately  for  each  candidate  for  whom  he  desires 
to  vote. 

Such  in  brief  outline  is  the  city  under  the  pro- 
posed Municipal  Program.  It  is  a  representative 
democracy.  The  people  are  the  government. 


The  proposed  Constitutional  Amendments  and 
General  Municipal  Corporations  Act  constituting 
the  Municipal  Program  submitted  by  a  special 
committee  of  the  National  Municipal  League  at 
its  meetings  in  1898  and  1899  and  unanimously 
adopted  by  the  League  in  1 899. 


239 


TEXT  OF  THE  MUNICIPAL  PROGRAM  OF 
THE  NATIONAL  MUNICIPAL  LEAGUE. 

CONSTITUTIONAL  AMENDMENTS. 
ARTICLE  FIRST. 

Section  i.  The  right  to  vote  and  registration 
(p.  243). 

Sec.  2.     Secrecy  in  voting  (p.  243). 

Sec.  3.  Separation  of  city  elections  from  state 
and  national  elections.  Nominations  to  city  office. 
Method  of  voting  (p.  243). 

ARTICLE  SECOND. 

No  private  or  local  bill  granting  exclusive  privileges, 
immunities,  or  franchises  (p.  244). 

ARTICLE  THIRD. 

Section  i.  A  city's  public  places  inalienable. 
Franchises  for  their  use  only  for  limited  term.  Stated 
financial  reports  of  the  grantee  and  right  of  city  to 
inspect  grantee's  books  a  condition  of  their  grant 
(p.  244). 

Sec.  2.  Limitation  of  city's  power  to  incur  debt 
and  of  its  tax  rate  (p.  245). 

Sec.  3.  City's  power  to  establish  direct  legislation 
or  minority  or  proportional  or  other  form  of  rep- 

241 


242  Municipal  Program 

resentation  as  to  elections  to  elective  city  offices 
(p.  248). 

Sec.  4.  Uniform  methods  of  city  accounting 
(p.  249). 

Sec.  5.     City  may  establish  minor  courts  (p.  250). 

Sec.  6.  Organization  of  cities  hereafter  created 
must  provide  for  mayor  vested  with  executive  power 
of  city  and  appointing  heads  of  all  city  departments 
except  Finance  Department;  a  council;  appoint- 
ments and  promotions  in  administrative  service  on 
the  merit  principle;  mayor  and  members  of  council 
only  city  officers  elected  by  popular  vote  (p.  250). 

Sec.  7.     General  powers  of  cities  (p.  251). 

Sec.  8.  Legislatures  shall  pass  a  general  municipal 
corporations  act  (p.  252). 

ARTICLE  FOURTH. 

A  city  having  a  population  of  twenty -five  thousand 
or  more  may  adopt  its  own  charter  and  frame  of 
government  (p.  252). 

ARTICLE  FIFTH. 
PETITIONS  (p.  255). 


CONSTITUTIONAL  AMENDMENTS. 


ARTICLE   FIRST. 

Section  i.  The  Right  to  Vote  and  Registration. 
Laws  shall  be  made  for  ascertaining  by  proper  proofs 
the  citizens  who  shall  be  entitled  to  vote  at  popular 
elections  and  for  the  personal  registration  of  voters, 
which  registration  shall  be  completed  at  least  ten 
days  before  each  election. 

Sec.  2.  Secrecy  in  Voting.  All  elections  by  the 
citizens  shall  be  by  a  secret  ballot  or  by  such  other 
method  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law,  provided  that 
absolute  secrecy  in  voting  be  preserved.  No  voter 

shall  disclose  at  any  polling  place  or  within  

feet  thereof  how  he  has  voted. 

Sec.  3.  City  Elections  and  Nominations.  Method 
of  Voting.  Elections  of  city  officers  elected  by  popular 
vote  shall  occur  at  a  different  date  from  that  of  any 
election  by  popular  vote  of  officers  of  the  state  or 
national  government.  Nominations  of  such  city 
officers  shall  be  by  petition,  signed  by  qualified 
voters  of  the  city  concerned.  The  number  of  the 
signatures  to  such  petition  shall  be  determined  by 
the  council  of  the  city  concerned,  but  not  more  than 
fifty  signatures  shall  be  required.  Such  petition 
shall  be  filed  in  the  office  of  the  mayor  at  least  thirty 

243 


244  Municipal  Program 

days  before  the  date  of  the  election;  provided, 
however,  that  in  the  case  of  the  death  or  withdrawal 
of  any  candidate  so  nominated  such  petition  may 
be  so  filed  within  a  less  period  than  thirty  days. 
The  voter  must  vote  separately  for  each  candidate 
for  whom  he  desires  to  vote;  if  the  election  is  by 
ballot  the  council  of  the  city  shall  determine  the 
form  of  the  ballot  to  be  used,  but  the  names  of  all 
candidates  for  the  same  city  office  must  be  printed 
upon  the  ballot  in  alphabetical  order  under  the 
title  of  the  office. 

ARTICLE   SECOND. 

Private  Bills.  The  legislature  shall  not  pass  a 
private  or  local  bill  granting  to  any  private  cor- 
poration, association,  or  individual  any  exclusive 
privilege,  immunity,  or  franchise  whatever. 

ARTICLE   THIRD. 

Section  i.  Streets  and  Public  Places.  Franchises. 
The  rights  of  every  city  now  existing,  or  hereafter 
created  within  the  state,  in  and  to  its  water  front, 
ferries,  wharf  property,  land  under  water,  public 
landings,  wharves,  docks,  streets,  avenues,  parks, 
bridges,  and  all  other  public  places,  are  hereby 
declared  to  be  inalienable,  except  by  a  fourth-fifths 
vote  of  all  the  members  elected  to  the  Council  ap- 
proved by  the  Mayor;  and  no  franchise,  lease  or 
right  to  use  the  same,  either  on,  through,  across, 
under,  or  over,  and  no  other  franchise  granted  by 
a  city,  to  any  private  corporation,  association,  or 
individual,  shall  be  for  a  longer  period  than  twenty- 
one  years.  Such  grant  and  any  contract  in  pursuance 


Constitutional  Amendments       245 

thereof  may  provide  that  upon  the  termination  of 
the  grant,  the  plant,  as  well  as  the  property,  if  any, 
of  the  grantee  in  the  streets,  avenues,  and  other 
public  places  shall  thereupon,  without  further  or  other 
compensation  to  the  grantee,  or  upon  the  payment 
of  a  fair  valuation  thereof,  be  and  become  the  property 
of  the  city;  but  the  grantee  shall  be  entitled  to  no 
payment  because  of  any  valuation  derived  from  the 
franchise.  Every  grant  shall  specify  the  mode  of 
determining  any  valuation  therein  provided  for,  and 
shall  make  adequate  provision  by  way  of  forfeiture 
of  the  grant,  or  otherwise,  to  secure  efficiency  of  pub- 
lic service  at  reasonable  rates,  and  the  maintenance 
of  the  property  in  good  order  throughout  the  term 
of  the  grant.  Every  grantee  of  such  franchises  or 
rights  to  use  shall  keep  books  of  accounts  and  make 
stated  quarterly  reports  to  the  Financial  Department 
of  the  city,  which  shall  contain  an  accurate  statement 
in  summarized  form  and  also  in  detail  of  all  financial 
receipts  from  all  sources  and  all  expenditures  for  all 
purposes,  together  with  a  full  statement  of  assets 
and  debts,  as  well  as  such  other  information  as  to 
the  financial  condition  of  such  grantee  as  said  de- 
partment may  require,  and  said  department  may 
inspect  and  examine,  or  cause  to  be  inspected  and 
examined,  at  all  reasonable  hours,  any  books  of 
account  of  such  grantee. 

Sec.  2.  Municipal  Indebtedness.  Tax  Rate.  No 
city  shall  hereafter  give  any  money  or  property,  or 
loan  its  money  or  credit  to  or  in  aid  of  any  private 
individual,  association,  or  corporation;  but  it  may 
make  such  provision  for  the  aid  and  support  of  its 
poor  as  may  be  authorized  by  law. 


246  Municipal  Program 

No  city  shall  become  indebted  for  any  purpose 
or  in  any  manner  to  an  amount  which,  including 

existing  indebtedness,  shall  exceed per  centum 

of  the  assessed  valuation  of  the  real  estate  within 
such  city  subject  to  taxation  as  shown  by  the  last 
preceding  assessment  for  state  or  city  taxes;  pro- 
vided, however,  that  in  determining  the  limitation 
of  the  city's  power  to  incur  indebtedness  there  shall 
not  be  included  the  following  classes  of  indebtedness : — 

(1)  Certificates  of  indebtedness  or  revenue  bonds 
issued   in   anticipation    of   the    collection    of   taxes, 
unless  the  same  be  not  paid  within  two  years  from 
the  date  of  issue ;   and  all  certificates  of  indebtedness 
and  revenue  bonds  shall  be  provided  for  and  payable 
from  the  taxes  levied  for  the  year  in  which  they  are 
issued,  and  shall  never  exceed  the  amount  of  such 
taxes ; 

(2)  Or  bonds  authorized  by  the  affirmative  vote 
of  two  thirds  of  the  members  of  the  Council,  approved 
by  the  Mayor  and  approved  by  the  affirmative  vote 
of  the  majority  of  the  qualified  voters  of  the  city 
voting  upon  the   question  of  their  issuance  at  the 
next  ensuing  city  election,  for  the  supply  of  water 
or   for   other   specific   undertaking   from  which   the 
city  will  derive  a  revenue;    but  from  and  after  a 
period  to  be  determined  by  the  Council,  not  exceeding 
five  years  from  the  date  of  such  election,  whenever 
and  for  so  long  as  such  ah  undertaking  fails  to  produce 
sufficient  revenue  to  pay  all  costs  of  operation  and 
administration  (including  interest  on  the  city's  bonds 
issued  therefor  and  the  cost  of  insurance  against  losses 
by  fire,   accidents  and  injuries  to  persons)   and  an 
annual  amount  sufficient  to  pay  at  or  before  maturity 


Constitutional  Amendments       247 

all  bonds  issued  on  account  of  said  undertaking,  all  such 
bonds  outstanding  shall  be  included  in  determining  the 
limitation  of  the  city's  power  to  incur  indebtedness, 
unless  the  principal  and  interest  thereof  be  payable 
exclusively  from  the  receipts  of  such  undertaking. 
The  City  Controller  shall  annually  report  to  the 
Council  in  detail  the  amount  of  the  revenue  from 
each  such  undertaking  and  whether  there  is  any,  and, 
if  so,  what  deficit  in  meeting  the  requirements  above 
set  forth. 

Provision  shall  be  made  at  the  time  of  their  issue 
for  raising  a  sum  of  money  by  taxation  sufficient  to 
pay,  as  it  falls  due,  the  interest  upon  all  city  bonds 
not  exclusively  payable  from  the  receipts  of  revenue- 
producing  undertakings,  and  to  pay  and  discharge 

the  principal  thereof  within  1  years  from  the 

date  of  their  issue;  but  whenever  in  any  year  the 
receipts  from  any  revenue-producing  undertaking 
shall  be  sufficient  to  pay  the  costs  of  operation  and 
administration  as  above  defined,  and  the  annual 
amount  hereinbefore  required,  the  tax  to  pay  the 
interest  and  provide  for  the  principal  of  the  bonds 
issued  for  such  undertaking  shall  not  be  collected, 
and  the  same  shall  be  paid  from  such  receipts. 

The  amount  to  be  raised  by  tax  for  city  purposes 
upon  real  and  personal  property,  or  either  of  them, 
in  addition  to  providing  for  the  principal  and  interest 
of  the  then  outstanding  bonded  indebtedness  shall 

not  in  the  aggregate  exceed  in  any  one  year per 

centum  of  the  assessed  valuation  of  the  real  estate 
subject  to  taxation  by  such  city,  to  be  ascertained 

*  This  period  should  not,  in  the  opinion  of  the  committee, 
exceed  thirty  years. 


248  Municipal  Program 

as  hereinbefore  prescribed  in  respect  to  the  city  debt.1 
Sec.  3.  Direct  Legislation.  Minority  and  Propor- 
tional Representation.  The  Council  of  any  city  may, 
with  the  consent  of  the  majority  of  the  qualified 
voters  of  the  city  voting  thereon  at  the  next  ensuing 

city  election  taking  place  not  less  than  days 

thereafter,  establish  a  method  of  direct  legislation 
so  that  qualified  voters  of  the  city  may  submit  and 
a  majority  thereof  voting  thereon  may  decide  by 
direct  vote  propositions  relative  to  city  matters,  and 
may  also  in  the  same  manner  establish  minority  or 
proportional  or  other  method  of  representation  as 
to  elections  to  elective  city  offices.  On  a  petition 
therefor,  filed  in  the  office  of  the  Mayor,  signed  by 
qualified  voters  of  the  city,  equal  in  number  to  two 
per  cent,  (which  shall  not  be  less  than  one  thousand) 
of  those  voting  at  the  last  preceding  city  election, 
a  proposition  to  establish  a  method  of  direct  legisla- 
tion, or  to  establish  minority  or  proportional  or 
other  method  of  representation  as  to  elections  to 
elective  city  offices,  must  be  submitted  to  the  qual- 
ified voters  of  the  city  at  the  next  ensuing  city  elec- 
tion occurring  at  least days  thereafter;  if  a 

majority  of  such  voters  voting  upon  such  proposition 
are  in  favor  thereof,  it  shall  go  at  once  into  effect. 

i  Under  this  section  a  city  may  issue  long-term  bonds, 
establish  and  maintain  a  sinking  fund  sufficient  to  provide  for 
their  payment  at  maturity ;  or  it  may  have  the  bonds  so  drawn 
that  a  certain  number  will  mature  each  year  and  be  paid  from 
the  tax  as  collected.  By  the  latter  method  the  city  avoids 
any  risk  incident  to  a  sinking  fund,  the  loss  of  interest  on 
money  not  invested,  any  premiums  it  might  pay  to  buy  back 
its  own  bonds,  and  the  abuses  incident  to  large  accumulations 
of  uninvested  money. 


Constitutional  Amendments       249 

Sec.  4.  Uniform  Methods  of  City  Accounting. 
Every  city  shall  keep  books  of  account.  It  shall  also 
make  stated  financial  reports  at  least  as  often  as 
once  a  year  to  the  1  in  accordance  with  forms  and 
methods  prescribed  by  him,  which  shall  be  applicable 
to  all  cities  within  the  State;  such  reports  shall  be 
printed  as  a  part  of  the  public  documents  of  the 
State,  and  submitted  by  the  1  to  the  Legislature  at 
its  next  regular  session.  Such  reports  shall  contain 
an  accurate  statement  in  summarized  form  and  also 
in  detail  of  the  financial  receipts  of  the  city  from  all 
sources,  and  of  the  expenditures  of  the  city  for  all 
purposes,  together  with  a  statement  in  detail  of  the 
debt  of  said  city  at  the  date  of  said  report,  and  of 
the  purposes  for  which  such  debt  has  been  incurred, 
as  well  as  such  other  information  as  may  be  required 
by  the1.  Said1  shall  have  power  by  himself,  or  by 
some  competent  person  or  persons  appointed  by  him, 
to  examine  into  the  affairs  of  the  financial  department 
of  any  city  within  the  State.  On  every  such  ex- 
amination inquiry  shall  be  made  as  to  the  financial 
condition  and  resources  of  the  city,  and  whether  the 
requirements  of  the  constitution  and  laws  have  been 
complied  with,  and  into  the  methods  and  accuracy 
of  the  city's  accounts,  and  as  to  such  other  matters 
as  the  said  1  may  prescribe.  The1  and  every  such 
examiner  appointed  by  him  shall  have  power  to 
administer  an  oath  to  any  person  whose  testimony 
may  be  required  on  any  such  examination,  and  to 
compel  the  appearance,  attendance  and  testimony 
of  any  such  person  for  the  purpose  of  any  such 

i  State  Controller  or  other  officer,  or  board,  which  may 
exercise  supervision  over  municipal  finances. 


250  Municipal  Program 

examination,  and  the  production  of  books  and 
papers.  A  report  of  each  such  examination  shall  be 
made,  and  shall  be  a  matter  of  public  record  in  the 
office  of  said1. 

Sec.  5.  City  Courts.  Cities  may  establish  minor 
courts,  which  shall  have  exclusive  civil  and  criminal 
jurisdiction  in  the  first  instance  for  the  enforcement 
of  city  ordinances  and  of  penalties  for  violations 
thereof.  Such  courts  shall  have  such  further  or 
other  jurisdiction  as  may  be  conferred  by  the  Legis- 
lature, subject  to  the  other  provisions  of  this  con- 
stitution, but  they  shall  not  have  any  equity 
jurisdiction,  nor  any  greater  jurisdiction  in  other 
respects  than  is  conferred  upon2.  No  one  shall  be 
eligible  to  appointment  as  such  justice  unless  he 
has  been  3  for  at  least  five  years.  Such  justices  shall 
be  subject  to  the  same  liabilities,  and  their  judgments 
and  proceedings  may  be  reviewed  in  the  same  manner 
and  to  the  same  extent  as  is  now  or  may  be  provided 
by  law  in  the  case  of  2  The  justices  of  such  courts 
and,  except  as  otherwise  in  this  constitution  provided, 
all  other  city  judicial  officers  shall  be  appointed  by 
the  Mayor,  and  may  be  removed  by  him  in  the  same 
manner  as  officers  in  the  subordinate  administrative 
service  of  the  city. 

Sec.  6.  Municipal  Organization.  In  the  organiza- 
tion of  every  city  hereafter  created  provision  shall 
be  made: 

»  State  Controller  or  other  officer,  or  board  which  may 
exercise  supervision  over  municipal  finances. 

2  Some  lower  court  recognized  as  a  regularly  constituted 
part  of  the  State's  judicial  system. 

3  An  attorney  and  counselor-at-law  of  the  State,  or  some 
equivalent  expression  appropriate  to  the  particular  State. 


Constitutional  Amendments       251 

For  a  Council,  the  members  of  which  shall  be 
elected  by  the  people; 

For  a  Mayor  elected  by  the  people. 

The  Mayor  shall  be  the  chief  executive  officer  of 
the  city,  and  shall  appoint  and  remove  all  heads  of 
departments  in  the  administrative  service  of  the 
city,  except  the  head  of  the  Finance  Department, 
who  shall  be  known  as  the  Controller. 

The  Mayor  shall  appoint  and  remove  all  other 
officers,  agents  and  employees  in  the  administrative 
service  of  the  city,  and  fill  all  vacancies  therein, 
provided,  however,  that  laborers  may  be  appointed 
and  removed  by  the  heads  of  departments  in  which 
they  are  employed  and  that  all  appointments  and 
promotions  in  the  subordinate  administrative  service 
of  the  city,  including  laborer^  shall  be  made  solely 
according  to  fitness,  which  shall  be  ascertained,  so 
far  as  practicable,  by  examinations  that,  so  far  as 
practicable,  shall  be  open  competitive  examinations. 

All  persons  in  the  administrative  service  of  the 
city,  except  the  Mayor,  shall  hold  their  offices  without 
fixed  terms. 

The  Mayor  and  members  of  the  Council  shall  be 
the  only  city  officers,  elected  by  popular  vote. 

Sec.  7.  General  Powers  of  Cities.  Every  city 
within  the  State  shall  be  vested  with  power  to  ac- 
quire, hold,  manage,  control  and  dispose  of  property. 
Within  its  corporate  limits,  it  shall  have  the  same 
powers  of  taxation  as  are  possessed  by  the  State; 
it  may  license  and  regulate  all  trades,  occupations, 
and  businesses,  and  shall  be  vested  with  power  to 
perform  and  render  all  public  services,  and  with  all 
powers  of  government,  subject  to  such  limitations 


252  Municipal  Program 

as  may  be  contained  in  the  constitution  and  laws  of 
the  State,  applicable  either  to  all  the  inhabitants  of 
the  State  or  to  all  the  cities  of  the  State,  or  in  such 
special  laws  applicable  to  less  than  all  cities  of  the 
State,  as  may  be  enacted  in  the  manner  hereinafter 
provided. 

Special  laws  shall  require  the  affirmative  vote  of 
two  thirds  of  all  the  members  of  the  Legislature, 
and  shall  not  be  valid  in  any  city  unless  they  receive 
the  formal  approval  of  its  Council  within  sixty  days 
after  the  passage  thereof  by  the  Legislature,  or, 
within  thirty  days  after  disapproval  by  the  Council 
of  the  city,  shall  again  be  passed  by  the  Legislature 
by  the  affirmative  vote  of  two  thirds  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature,  which  two  thirds  shall  include 
three  fourths  of  the  me.m*rs  of  the  Legislature,  from 
districts  outside  of  the  city  or  cities  to  be  affected. 
The  failure  of  the  Council  of  the  city  to  take  formal 
action  approving  or  disapproving  a  special  law  shall 
be  deemed  a  disapproval  thereof.  Laws  repealing 
such  special  laws  may  be  passed  in  the  manner 
provided  for  the  passage  of  general  laws. 

Sec.  8.  General  Municipal  Corporations  Act.  The 
Legislature  shall  pass  a  general  municipal  corporations 
Act  applicable  to  all  the  cities  in  the  State  which 
shall,  by  popular  vote,  determine  to  adopt  it. 

ARTICLE  FOURTH. 

Power  of  Cities  to  Frame  Their  Own  Charters.  Sub- 
ject to  the  constitution  and  the  laws  of  the  State, 
applicable  to  all  of  the  inhabitants  or  all  the  cities 
thereof,  and  to  such  special  laws  as  may  be  passed 


Constitutional  Amendments       253 

in  the  manner  hereinbefore  provided,  any  city  having 
a  population  of  twenty-five  thousand  or  more  may 
adopt  its  own  charter  and  frame  of  government  in 
the  following  manner: 

The  Council  of  said  city  may,  and,  on  a  petition 
therefor,  filed  in  the  office  of  the  Mayor,  signed  by 
qualified  voters  of  the  city  equal  in  number  to  two 
per  cent,  (which  shall  not  be  less  than  one  thousand) 
of  those  voting  at  the  last  preceding  election,  must, 
provide  by  ordinance  for  an  election  to  take  place 

not  less  than  days  nor  more  than  days 

thereafter,  upon  a  proposition  for  the  election  of  a 

board  of  not  less  than  fifteen  nor  more  than  

members,  to  prepare  and  propose  a  charter  and 
frame  of  government  for  such  city.  If  such  propo- 
sition shall  receive  the  affirmative  vote  of  a  majority 
of  the  qualified  voters  of  the  city  voting  thereon, 
the  Council  must,  within  fifteen  days  thereafter, 
provide  for  the  election  of  such  a  board  within  not 

more  than  days.     It  shall  be  the  duty  of  said 

board  to  convene  upon  the  after 

said  election,  and  thereafter  and  within  days 

to  prepare  and  propose  a  charter  and  frame  of  gov- 
ernment for  such  city,  which  shall  be  signed  in 
duplicate  by  the  members  thereof  or  a  majority  of 
them,  and  returned,  one  copy  thereof  to  the  Mayor 
and  the  other  to  the  Secretary  of  State.  Such  pro- 
posed charter  and  frame  of  government  shall  then 
be  published  daily  in  two  papers  of  general  circulation 
in  such  city  for  at  least  twenty  days,  and  within  not 
less  than  thirty  days  and  not  more  than  sixty  days 
after  such  publication,  shall  be  submitted  to  the 
qualified  voters  of  such  city  at  a  special  or  general 


254  Municipal  Program 

municipal  election,  and  the  Council  of  said  city  shall 
provide  by  ordinance  for  the  holding  of  such  special 
election  unless  a  general  municipal  election  shall  be 
held  within  the  time  hereinbefore  prescribed. 

If  a  majority  of  the  qualified  voters  of  the  city 
voting  thereon  shall  ratify  the  same,  it  shall  become 
the  charter  and  frame  of  government  of  such  city 
and  the  organic  law  thereof,  and  supersede  and 
repeal  all  laws  inconsistent  therewith  and  any  existing 
charter  and  all  amendments  thereof.  A  copy  of 
such  charter  and  frame  of  government  duly  certified 
by  the  proper  authorities  of  such  city,  setting  forth 
its  submission  to  the  legally  qualified  voters  of  the 
city  and  its  ratification  by  them,  shall  be  made  in 
duplicate,  and  deposited,  one  in  the  office  of  the 
Secretary  of  State  and  the  other  among  the  archives 
of  the  city.  All  courts  shall  take  judicial  notice 
thereof.  The  charter  and  frame  of  government  so 
adopted  may  be  amended  at  intervals  of  not  less 
than  two  years  by  proposals  therefor  which  the 
Council  of  the  city  may,  and  when  requested  by  a 
petition  filed  in  the  office  of  the  Mayor,  signed  by 
qualified  voters  of  said  city  equal  in  number  to  two 
per  cent,  (which  shall  not  be  less  than  one  thousand) 
of  those  voting  at  the  last  preceding  city  election, 
must  submit  at  the  next  city  election  held  at  least 
sixty  days  after  the  adoption  of  the  ordinance  or 
the  filing  of  such  petition  in  the  office  of  the  Mayor. 
Each  such  proposed  amendment  before  it  goes  into 
effect  must  be  ratified  by  a  majority  of  the  qualified 
voters  voting  thereon,  as  herein  provided  for  the 
adoption  of  the  charter  and  frame  of  government. 
In  submitting  any  such  proposal  any  alternative 


Constitutional  Amendments       255 

article  or  proposition  may  be  presented  for  the 
choice  of  the  voters,  and  may  be  voted  on  separately 
without  prejudice  to  others. 

ARTICLE  FIFTH. 

Petitions.  After  the  filing  of  a  petition  in  accord- 
ance with  the  provisions  of  the  foregoing  articles, 
if  the  Council  of  the  city  neglects  or  fails  to  provide 
by  ordinance  for  an  election  as  hereinbefore  directed, 
then  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Mayor  to  order  such 
election,  and  his  order  for  such  purpose,  duly  signed 
by  him  and  filed  in  the  archives  of  the  city,  shall 
have  the  same  force  and  effect  as  an  ordinance  for 
the  same  purpose. 

The  petitions  mentioned  in  the  foregoing  articles 
need  not  be  one  paper,  and  may  be  printed  or  written, 
but  the  signatures  thereto  must  be  the  autograph 
signatures  of  the  persons  whose  names  purport  to 
be  signed.  To  each  signature  the  house  address  of 
the  signer  must  be  added,  and  the  signature  must 
be  made  and  acknowledged  or  proved  before  an 
officer  authorized  by  law  to  take  acknowledgment 
and  proof  of  deeds.  The  certificate  of  such  officer 
under  his  official  seal  that  a  signature  was  so  made 
and  acknowledged  or  proved  shall  be  sufficient  proof 
of  the  genuineness  of  the  signature  for  the  purposes 
of  these  articles. 

The  signing  of  another's  name,  or  of  a  false  or 
fictitious  name,  to  a  petition,  or  the  signing  of  a 
certificate  falsely  stating  either  that  a  signature  was 
made  in  the  presence  of  the  officer  or  acknowledged 
or  proved  before  him,  shall  be  punishable  as  felonies. 


MUNICIPAL  CORPORATIONS  ACT. 
ARTICLE  I. 

INCORPORATION    OF    CITIES.     PROCEDURE 
FOR  ORGANIZATION  OF  EXISTING  CITIES 
UNDER  THIS  ACT  AND  FOR  ANNEXA- 
TION OF  TERRITORY. 

Section  i.  Cities,  villages,  towns,  and  boroughs 
heretofore  incorporated  may  organize  under  this  Act 
(p.  260). 

Sec.  2.  How  a  city  organized  under  this  Act  may 
annex  territory  (p.  261). 

ARTICLE  II. 
POWERS  OF  CITIES. 

Section  i.     Corporate  Powers  (p.  263). 

Sec.     2.  Powers  of  Ordinance  (p.  264). 

Sec.  3.  Street  Powers,  Water- works,  Buildings, 

and  Sewers  (p.  264). 

Sec.  4.  Wharves,  Docks,  Harbor,  and  Ferries 
(p.  264). 

Sec.  5.  Markets,  Market  Places,  and  Abattoirs 
(p.  264). 

Sec.     6.  Charities  and  Correction  (p.  265). 

Sec.     7.  Fines,  Penalties,  and  Imprisonment  (p. 

265). 

256 


Corporations  Act  257 

Sec.  8.  Schools,  Museums,  Libraries,  and  Other 
Institutions  (p.  265). 

Sec.     9.     Minor  Courts  (p.  266). 

Sec.  10.     Franchises  (p.  267). 

Sec.  ii.  Contracts  for  Labor  or  Materials  Limited 
to  Five  Years  (p.  268). 

Sec.  12.     Taxes  (p.  269). 

Sec.  13.     Local  Assessments  (p.  269). 

Sec.  14.     Indebtedness  and  Tax  Rate  (p.  270). 

Sec.  15.     City  Accounts  (p.  273). 

Sec.  1 6.  City  the  Local  Authority  for  Execution 
of  General  Laws  of  the  State  (p.  274). 

Sec.  17.  State  Supervision  of  the  City's  Exercise 
of  its  Powers  (p.  274). 

ARTICLE  III. 
THE  MAYOR. 

Section,  i.     Mayor's  Term  of  Office  (p.  275). 
Sec.  2.     Filling  a  Vacancy  (p.  275). 
Sec.  3.     Disability  of  Mayor  (p.  275). 
Sec.  4.     Removal  of  Mayor  (p.  276). 
Sec.  5.     Presence  of  Mayor  and  Heads  of  Depart- 
ments at  Council  Meetings  (p.  276). 

Sec.  6.     Veto  Power  of  Mayor  (p.  276). 

Sec.  7.     City  Budget  (p.  277). 

Sec.  8.     Compensation  of  Mayor  (p.  278). 

ARTICLE  IV. 

THE    ADMINISTRATIVE    SERVICE    OF    THE 
CITY. 

Section  i.     Appointive  Officers  (p.  278). 
Sec.  2.     Civil-service  Commissioners  (p.  278). 


258  Municipal  Program 

Sec.  3.     Civil-service  Regulations  (p.  279). 

Sec.  4.  Reports  of  Civil-service  Commissioners 
(p.  282). 

Sec.  5.  Duty  of  Public  Officials  to  Obey  Civil- 
service  Regulations  (p.  282). 

Sec.  6.  Civil-service  Commissioners  to  Keep  a 
Roster  of  the  Administrative  Service.  Payment  of 
Public  Employees.  Action  to  Restrain  or  Recover 
Illegal  Payment  of  Salaries  (p.  283). 

Sec.  7.  Records  of  Civil-service  Commissioners. 
Their  Duty  to  Enforce  Regulations  (p.  284). 

Sec.  8.  Power  of  Civil-service  Commissioners  to 
Investigate  (p.  285). 

Sees.  9-15.  Specific  Prohibitions  and  Penalties 
under  the  Civil-service  Provisions  of  this  Act  (pp.  287- 
291). 

Sec.  1 6.     Power  of  Removal  (p.  291). 

Sec.  17.     Power  of  Mayor  to  Investigate  (p.  292). 

ARTICLE  V. 
THE  COUNCIL. 

Section  i.  Council  to  Exercise  Municipal  Powers 
(p.  292). 

Sec.  2.  Composition  of  Council.  Members  of 
Council  shall  Serve  without  Pay  (p.  292). 

Sec.  3.  Council  Judge  of  the  Elections  and  Quali- 
fications of  Its  Own  Members  (p.  293). 

Sec.  4.     Ineligibility  of  Councilors  (p.  293). 

Sec.  5.  Council  Elects  Its  Own  Officers  and 
Determines  Its  Own  Rules  (p.  294). 

Sec.  6.     Quorum  of  Council  (p.  294). 

Sec.  7.  Meetings  of  Council.  Proceedings  of 
Council  and  Sessions  of  its  Committees  to  be  Public. 


Corporations  Act  259 

Special  Requirements  as  to  Publication  of  Ordinances 
Granting  Franchises  (p.  294). 

Sec.  8.  Council  may  Establish  Municipal  Offices 
(p.  296). 

Sec.  9.     Council's  Powers  of  Investigation  (p.  296): 

Sec.  10.  Council's  Powers  to  Regulate  Assess- 
ments, Levy  Taxes,  and  Make  Appropriations  (p.  296). 

Sec.  ii.  Council  may  by  Ordinance  Provide  for 
Direct  Legislation  or  for  Minority  or  Proportional  or 
other  Form  of  Representation  in  Municipal  Elections 
(p.  297). 

ARTICLE  VI. 
THE  CONTROLLER. 

Council  Elects  City  Controller.  Powers  and  Duties 
of  Controller  (p.  298). 


ARTICLE  VII. 
GENERAL  PROVISIONS. 


Section  i.     Actions  by  Citizens  (p.  301). 

Sec.  2.  •  Municipal  Elections  to  Take  Place  at  a 
Separate  Date  from  State  or  National  Elections  (p. 
302). 

Sec.  3.  Nominations  for  Elective  Municipal  Office 
to  be  Made  by  Petition  at  least  Thirty  Days  before 
Election  (p.  303). 

Sec.  4.     Petitions  (p.  303). 


< 


ARTICLE  I. 
THE  INCORPORATION  OF  CITIES. 

Section  i.     When  City  may  be  Incorporated. 

All  cities  hereafter  created  within  this  State  shall 
be  organized  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act.  l  Any 
city  or  borough,  or  any  incorporated  town  or  village 

of  inhabitants,  heretofore  incorporated  under 

the  Laws  of  the  State,  may  organize  under  this  Act 
in  the  following  manner: 

On  a  petition  filed  in  the  office  of  2  signed  by  not 
less  than  five  hundred  qualified  voters  of  such  cor- 
poration, or  on  the  two-thirds  vote  of  the  legislative 
authority  of  such  corporation,  there  shall  be  submitted 
at  the  next  local  election,  3  occurring  at  least  thirty 
days  after  such  filing  or  vote,  the  question  whether 
or  not  the  form  of  organization  provided  in  this  Act 
shall  be  the  form  of  organization  of  said  corporation, 
and  in  case  a  majority  of  the  qualified  voters 
thereof  voting  on  said  question,  vote  in  favor  thereof, 
said  city,  village,  incorporated  town,  or  borough  shall 

»  A  proper  method  of  procedure  adapted  to  the  local  needs 
of  the  State  should  be  provided. 

2  /.  e.     The  office  where  the  public  records  of  such  cor- 
porations are  required  to  be  kept,  e.g.,  city  clerk's  or  village 
clerk's  office. 

3  The  method  of  submission  muse  be  set  forth  and  should 
be  adapted  to  the  election  laws  of  the  particular  State. 

260 


Corporations  Act  261 


thereupon  be  and  become  a  body  politic  and  corporate 
under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  provided,  however, 
that  the  official  terms  of  the  officers  elected  at  the 
next  ensuing  local  election,  held  in  accordance  with 
the  provisions  of  this  Act,  shall  commence,  and  the 
terms  of  all  offices  and  all  officers  existing  under  such 
prior  organization  shall  cease  and  determine  *  on  the 
first  Monday  of  the  month  succeeding  such  local 
election  held  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act.  The 
first  election  of  officers  of  the  new  corporation  shall 
take  place  on  the  first  day  for  holding  local  elections, 
provided  by  law,  which  occurs  at  least  sixty  days 
after  the  adoption  of  this  Act,  provided,  however, 
that  if  there  be  no  such  day  fixed  by  law  for  holding 
local  elections,  then  such  first  election  2  shall  take 
place  on  the  last  Tuesday  of  the  month  following 
such  adoption. 

Sec.  2.     Annexation  of  Territory. 

Any  city  organized  under  the  provisions  of  this 
Act  may  annex  additional  territory  contiguous  and 
adjacent  to  the  limits  of  said  city  in  the  following 
manner,  and  such  territory  and  the  inhabitants 
thereof,  when  so  annexed,  shall  become  a  part  of 
said  city  and  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  thereof. 

Upon  a vote  of  the  Council  of  the  city 

desiring  the  annexation  of  such  territory,  and  a 
petition  filed  in  the  office  of  the  Mayor  of  the  city 
signed  by  qualified  voters  of  said  territory  in  number 

»  If  this  should  shorten  the  term  of  office  contrary  to 
constitutional  provisions  a  different  plan  would  be  necessary. 

2  If  there  is  no  general  law  under  which  such  an  election 
can  be  held,  the  Act  should  include  appropriate  provisions 
therefor  in  harmony  with  the  election  system  of  the  particular 
State. 


262  Municipal  Program 

equal  to  two  per  cent,  of  those  voting  at  the  last 
preceding  local  election,  the  question  whether  such 
territory  shall  be  annexed  shall  be  submitted  to  the 
qualified  voters  residing  in  said  territory  at  the  next 
general  election  held  therein  at  least  thirty  days  there- 
after, and  in  case  a  majority  of  the  qualified  voters 
residing  in  said  territory  and  voting  on  said  question 
vote  in  favor  of  said  annexation,  said  question  shall 
be  submitted  to  the  Legislature  of  the  State,  and,  in 
case  the  Legislature  shall  vote  in  favor  thereof,  the 
said  territory  shall  thereupon  be  and  become  a  part 
of  said  city,  and  the  public  roads  and  streets  thereof 
become  reverts  of  said  city,  and  the  property  and 
liabilities  of  any  therein  existing  local  municipal 
corporation  or  corporations  shall  belong  to  and  be 
assumed  by  said  city,  and  the  inhabitants  of  said 
territory  shall  become  subject  in  all  respects  to  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  authorities  of  said  city,  and  the 
jurisdiction  of  any  public  authority  exercised  thereto- 
fore in  said  territory  shall,  so  far  as  it  is  in  conflict 
with  the  corporate  authority  of  such  city,  thereupon 
cease  and  determine. 

The  apportionment  of  taxation  for  the  payment  of 
the  debts  of  such  city  and  of  the  local  municipal  cor- 
poration or  corporations  theretofore  existing,  in  such 
annexed  territory  shall  be  adjusted  by commis- 
sioners to  be  appointed  by  the  judges  of  the 

Court,  who  shall  also,  in  case  the  territory  annexed  does 
not  include  the  entire  territory  of  an  existing  corpora- 
tion, equitably  apportion  the  property  and  liabilities 
of  such  corporation  between  it  and  such  city.  Said 
commissioners  shall  give  public  hearings,  shall  have 
power  to  compel  the  attendance  and  testimony  of 


Corporations  Act  263 

witnesses  under  oath,  and  the  production  of  books 
and  papers,  and  shall  conduct  their  proceedings 
according  to  the  rules  that  shall  be  established  and 
published  by  the  judges  of  said  court.  Any  vacancy 
occurring  in  said  commission  shall  be  rilled  by  the 
remaining  members.  The  report  of  the  commissioners, 
or  a  majority  of  them,  shall  be  filed  in  the  office  of 
the  clerk  of  said  court,  and  shall  be  final  and  con- 
clusive, unless  exceptions  are  filed  thereto  within 
thirty  days  after  filing.  In  case  of  exceptions,  the 
court  appointing  said  commission  shall  have  power 
to  overrule  the  same,  and  confirm  said  report,  or  to 
set  the  same  aside  and  refer  the  matter  back  to  the 
same,  or  another  commission,  when  the  same  proceed- 
ing shall  be  had. 

ARTICLE   II. 
THE  POWERS  OF  CITIES. 

Section  i.     Corporate  Powers. 

The  inhabitants  of  any  city  incorporated  under 
this  Act  are  hereby  constituted  a  body  politic  and 
corporate  which  shall  have  perpetual  succession,  may 
use  a  common  seal,  sue  and  be  sued,  and,  for  any 
purpose  which  it  deems  necessary  or  expedient  for 
the  public  interest,  perform  and  render  all  public 
services,  and  acquire  property  within  or  without  the 
city  limits  by  purchase,  gift,  devise,  or  by  condem- 
nation proceedings,  and  hold,  manage,  and  control 
the  same. l 

1  It  should  be  provided  that  these  proceedings  should  be 
conducted  in  accordance  with  the  general  law  on  the  subject 
if  there  is  one  and  it  is  applicable;  or  that  the  necessary 


264  Municipal  Program 

Sec.  2.     Powers  of  Ordinance. 

Every  city  organized  under  this  Act  shall  have 
power  to  enact  and  to  enforce  all  ordinances  necessary 
to  protect  health,  life,  and  property,  to  prevent  and 
summarily  abate  and  remove  nuisances,  and  to 
preserve  and  enforce  the  good  government,  order, 
and  security  of  the  city  and  its  inhabitants. 

Sec.  3.  Street  Powers,  Water-works,  Buildings,  and 
Sewers. 

Said  city  shall  have  power  to  lay  out,  establish, 
open,  close,  alter,  widen,  extend,  grade,  care  for, 
pave,  supervise,  maintain  and  improve  streets,  alleys, 
sidewalks,  squares,  parks,  public  places,  and  bridges, 
to  vacate  the  same,  and  to  regulate  the  use  thereof, 
and  to  prescribe  and  regulate  the  height  of  buildings 
adjacent  thereto  or  abutting  thereon,  and  the  method 
and  style  of  construction  of  the  same,  to  vacate  and 
close  private  ways,  and  to  construct  and  maintain 
water-works  and  sewers,  and  to  do  all  things  it  may 
deem  needful  or  appropriate  to  regulate,  care  for 
and  dispose  of  sewage,  offal,  garbage,  and  other 
refuse. 

Sec.  4.     Wharves,  Docks,  Harbor,  and  Ferries. 

The  city  shall  have  power  to  establish,  erect, 
maintain,  lease,  and  regulate  wharves  and  docks,  charge 
wharfage  and  dockage,  regulate  the  use  of  the  harbor, 
and  establish,  lease,  regulate,  and  operate  ferries,  and 
charge  tolls  and  ferriage. 

Sec.  5.     Markets,  Market-places,  and  Abatto-irs. 

The   city   shall    have   power   to   establish,    lease, 

proceedings  should  be  the  same  as  those  under  which  other 
public  or  quasi-public  corporations  may  act. 


Corporations  Act  265 

maintain,  regulate,  and  operate  markets  and  market- 
places and  abattoirs. 

Sec.  6.     Charities  and  Correction. 

The  city  shall  have  power  to  establish,  maintain, 
and  regulate  workhouses,  houses  of  correction,  and 
such  other  places  of  incarceration  and  reformatory 
institutions,  and  such  hospitals  and  charitable 
institutions  as  it  may  deem  expedient. 

Sec.  7.     Fines,  Penalties  and  Imprisonment. 

The  city  shall  have  power  to  enforce  obedience  to 
and  observance  of  its  ordinances  and  regulations  by 
ordaining  reasonable  fines,  penalties,  and  terms  of 
imprisonment. 

Sec.  8.  Schools,  Museums,  Libraries,  and  Other 
Institutions. 

The  city  shall  have  power  to  establish  and  maintain 
schools,  museums,  libraries,  and  such  other  institu- 
tions for  the  instruction,  enlightenment,  and  welfare 
of  its  inhabitants  as  it  may  deem  appropriate  or 
necessary  for  the  public  interest  or  advantage. 

The  number,  duties,  and  salaries  of  teachers  and 
other  subordinate  officers  of  such  institutions  shall 
be  fixed  by  the  officer  (or  board)  in  charge  of  the 
educational  administration  of  the  city. 1 

»  The  Committee  is  of  the  opinion  that  the  local  schools 
should  be  under  local  control  subject  to  a  State  supervision 
which  compels  the  local  standard  to  be  fully  equal  to  the  State 
standard,  and  that  so  far  and  so  rapidly  as  practicable  this 
result  should  be  accomplished.  The  Committee  is  aware, 
however,  that  there  is  a  great  diversity  of  practice  in  the 
different  States,  and  that  on  account  of  the  deep  popular  in- 
terest in  education  there  is  no  branch  of  the  public  adminis- 
tration which  on  the  whole  has  been  so  successful.  It  has 
therefore  seemed  best  to  leave  the  elaboration  of  the  provisions 


266  Municipal  Program 

Sec.  9.     Minor  Courts. 

The  city  shall  have  the  power  to  establish  minor 
courts  for  the  enforcement  of  its  ordinances,  which 
shall  also  be  vested  with  the  civil  and  criminal  juris- 
diction of  (justices  of  the  peace) 2.  The  justices  of 
such  courts  shall  be  men  learned  in  the  law,  and  shall 
be  appointed  by  the  Mayor,  and  may  be  removed  by 
him  in  the  same  manner  as  officers  in  the  subordinate 
administrative  service  of  the  city.  No  one  shall  be 
eligible  to  appointment  as  such  justice  unless  he  has 

been  1  for  at  least  five  years.  Such  justices 

shall  have  within  the  city  in  which  they  have  been 
appointed,  and  in  cases  where  the  alleged  crime  or 
misdemeanor  has  been  committed  within  said  city, 
exclusive  jurisdiction  to  issue  all  warrants,  hear  and 
determine  all  complaints,  and  to  conduct  all  exami- 
nations and  trials  in  criminal  cases  that  may  now 

be  had  by 2,  and  shall  have  the  same  power 

and  jurisdiction  in  such  criminal  cases  as  2 

now  have  by  law  or  as  may  hereafter  be  conferred 

upon  2,  and  shall  have  exclusive  jurisdiction 

in  all  cases  of  violations  of  such  ordinances.  Such 
justices  shall  be  subject  to  the  same  liabilities,  and 
their  judgments  and  proceedings  may  be  reviewed 
in  the  same  manner  and  to  the  same  extent  as  now  by 
law  provided  in  the  case  of  2 

of  the  draft  relative  to  education  to  be  made  in  accordance 
with  the  local  conditions  of  each  particular  State. 

»  An  attorney  and  counselor-at-law  of  the  State,  or  some 
similar  expression  appropriate  to  the  particular  State. 

2  The  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction  of  justices  of  the  peace 
is  well  denned  in  some  States.  Where  it  is  not,  some  other 
proper  officer  should  be  designated.  The  intention  here 


Corporations  Act  267 

Sec.  10.     Street  and  Other  Franchises. 

The  rights  of  the  city  in  and  to  its  water  front, 
ferries,  wharf  property,  land  under  water,  public 
landings,  wharves,  docks,  streets,  avenues,  parks, 
bridges,  and  all  other  public  places  are  hereby  declared 
to  be  inalienable,  except  by  a  four-fifths  vote  of  all 
the  members  elected  to  the  Council,  approved  by  the 
Mayor;  and  no  franchise  or  lease  or  right  to  use  the 
same,  either  on,  through,  across,  under,  or  over,  and 
no  other  franchise  granted  by  the  city  to  any  private 
corporation,  association,  or  individual,  shall  be 
granted  for  a  longer  period  than  twenty-one  years; 
and,  in  addition  to  any  other  form  of  compensation, 
the  grantee  shall  pay  annually  a  sum  of  money, 
based  in  amount  upon  its  gross  receipts,  to  the  city. 
Such  grant  and  any  contract  in  pursuance  thereof 
may  provide  that,  upon  the  termination  of  the  grant, 
the  plant  as  well  as  the  property,  if  any,  of  the  grantee, 
in  the  streets,  avenues,  and  other  public  places  shall 
thereupon,  without  further  or  other  compensation  to 
the  grantee,  or  upon  the  payment  of  a  fair  valuation 
thereof,  be  and  become  the  property  of  the  city,  but 
the  grantee  shall  be  entitled  to  no  payment  because 
of  any  valuation  derived  from  the  franchise.  Every 
grant  shall  specify  the  mode  of  determining  any 
valuation  therein  provided  for,  and  shall  make 
adequate  provision  by  way  of  forfeiture  of  the  grant 

is  to  confer  upon  municipal  judicial  officers,  to  the  exclusion 
of  the  ordinary  minor  State  judicial  officers,  such  minor  civil 
and  criminal  jurisdiction  as  experience  has  shown  should  be 
exercised  by  magistrates  of  this  class.  It  is  probable  that  in 
some  States  a  constitutional  amendment  would  be  required 
in  order  to  enact  the  provisions  of  this  section  into  valid  law. 


268  Municipal  Program 

or  otherwise  to  secure  efficiency  of  public  service  at 
reasonable  rates  and  the  maintenance  of  the  property 
in  good  order  throughout  the  term  of  the  grant. 
Every  grantee  of  a  franchise  from  the  city  rendering 
a  service  to  be  paid  for  wholly  or  in  part  by  users  of 
such  service  shall  keep  books  of  account  and  make 
stated  quarterly  reports  in  writing  to  the  City  Con- 
troller, which  shall  contain  an  accurate  statement, 
in  summarized  form  and  also  in  detail,  of  all  financial 
receipts  from  all  sources  and  all  expenditures  for  all 
purposes,  together  with  a  full  statement  of  assets 
and  debts,  as  well  as  such  other  information  as  to 
the  financial  condition  of  such  grantee  as  the  City 
Controller  may  require.  Such  reports  shall  be  public 
records,  and  shall  be  printed  as  a  part  of  the  annual 
report  of  the  City  Controller,  and  said  City  Controller 
may  inspect  and  examine,  or  cause  to  be  inspected 
and  examined,  at  all  reasonable  hours,  any  books  of 
account  of  such  grantee.  Such  books  of  account  shall 
be  kept  and  such  reports  made  in  accordance  with 
forms  and  methods  prescribed  by  the  City  Controller, 
which,  so  far  as  practicable,  shall  be  uniform  for  all 
such  grantees. 

The  city  may,  if  it  deems  proper,  acquire  or  con- 
struct, and  may  also  operate  on  its  own  account, 
and  may  regulate  or  prohibit  the  construction  or 
operation  of  railroads  or  other  means  of  transit 
or  transportation  and  methods  for  the  production  or 
transmission  of  heat,  light,  electricity,  or  other 
power,  in  any  of  their  forms,  by  pipes,  wires,  or  other 
means. 

Sec.  ii.     Contracts  for  Labor  and  Materials. 

No  contract  to  which  the  city  is  a  party  for  serv- 


Corporations  Act  269 

ices  rendered  or  to  be  rendered,  or  for  goods  or 
materials  furnished  or  to  be  furnished,  shall  be  for 
a  longer  period  than  five  years. 1 

All  contracts  except  for  services  rendered  shall  be 
made  upon  specifications,  and  shall  be  let  in  the 
manner  to  be  prescribed  by  general  ordinance. 

In  no  case  shall  the  contract  for  any  material, 
machinery  or  process  which  or  the  supply  of  which, 
is  controlled  by  one  person  or  company,  be  let  with 
a  contract  for  work  or  for  other  material  or  machinery. 

No  contract  shall  be  entered  into  until  after  an 
appropriation  has  been  made  therefor,  nor  in  excess 
of  the  amount  appropriated. 

Each  contract,  before  being  binding  on  the  city, 
must  be  countersigned  by  the  Controller,  and  charged 
to  the  proper  appropriation,  and  whenever  the 
contracts  charged  to  any  appropriation  equal  the 
amount  thereof,  no  further  contracts  shall  be  counter- 
signed by  him. 

Sec.  12.     Taxes. 

Within  its  corporate  limits  the  city  shall  have  the 
same  powers  of  taxation  as  are  possessed  by  the 
State.  It  may  license  and  regulate  all  trades,  occu- 
pations, and  businesses. 

Sec.  13.     Local  Assessments. 

The  city  shall  have  power  to  make  local  improve- 
ments by  special  assessment,  or  by  special  taxation, 
or  both,  of  property  adjudged  to  have  received 
special  benefit,  or  by  general  taxation;  the  ascertain- 
ment and  apportionment  of  the  benefits  derived  from 

i  The  intention  of  this  provision  is  to  prevent  the  city  from 
entering  into  any  long-term  contracts  except  the  issue  of 
long-term  bonds. 


270  Municipal  Program 

such  local  improvements  shall  be  made  in  accordance 
with  State  laws.  No  improvement  to  be  paid  for  by 
special  assessment  or  by  special  taxation  shall  be 
undertaken  without  the  consent  of  a  majority  in 
interest  and  number  of  the  owners  of  the  property 
to  be  taxed  or  assessed,  unless  the  ordinance  therefor 
shall  receive  on  final  passage  the  affirmative  vote  of 
three  fourths  of  all  the  members  of  the  Council,  and 
be  approved  by  the  Mayor  after  a  public  hearing  of 
the  persons  interested,  of  which  due  notice  shall  be 
given  by  advertisement  in  the  manner  to  be  prescribed 
by  general  ordinance. 

Sec.  14.     Indebtedness  and  Tax  Rate. 

The  city  shall  have  power  to  borrow  on  the  credit 
of  the  corporation,  and  issue  bonds  therefor  in  such 
amounts  and  form,  and  on  such  conditions  as  it  shall 
prescribe,  but  the  credit  of  the  city  shall  not  in  any 
manner  be  given  or  loaned  to  or  in  aid  of  any  individ- 
ual, association,  or  corporation,  except  that  it  may  make 
suitable  provision  for  the  aid  and  support  of  its  poor. 

No  city  shall  become  indebted  for  any  purpose  or 
in  any  manner  to  an  amount  which,  including  existing 

indebtedness,  shall  exceed  l  per  centum  of  the 

assessed  valuation  of  the  real  estate  within  such 
city  subject  to  taxation  as  shown  by  the  last  preceding 
assessment  for  State  or  city  taxes;  provided,  how- 
ever, that  in  determining  the  limitation  of  the  city's 
power  to  incur  indebtedness  there  shall  not  be  included 
the  following  classes  of  indebtedness : 

*  The  limitation  is  intended  to  be  the  one  provided  in  the 
State  Constitution.  If  there  is  no  such  constitutional  provis- 
ion, it  should  be  fixed  somewhere  between  five  and  ten  per 
cent.,  as  appears  to  be  proper. 


Corporations  Act  271 

(1)  Certificates  of  indebtedness  or  revenue  bonds 
issued  in  anticipation  of  the  collection  of  taxes,  unless 
the  same  be  not  paid  within  two  years  from  the  date 
of  issue;    and  all   certificates   of  indebtedness   and 
revenue  bonds  shall  be  provided  for  and  payable 
from  the  taxes  levied  for  the  year  in  which  they  are  is- 
sued, and  shall  never  exceed  the  amount  of  such  taxes ; 

(2)  Or  bonds  authorized  by  the  affirmative  vote 
of  two  thirds  of  the  members  of  the  Council,  approved 
by  the  Mayor,  and  approved  by  the  affirmative  vote 
of  the  majority  of  the  qualified  voters  of  the  city 
voting  upon  the  question  of  their  issuance  at  the 
next  ensuing  city  election,  for  the  supply  of  water  or 
for  other  specific  undertaking  from  which  the  city 
will  derive  a  revenue;   but  from  and  after  a  period 
to   be   determined   by   the    Council,   not   exceeding 
five  years  from  the  date  of  such  election,  whenever 
and  for  so  long  as  such  an  undertaking  fails  to  produce 
sufficient  revenue  to  pay  all  costs  of  operation  and 
administration  (including  interest  on  the  city's  bonds 
issued   therefor  and   the  cost   of  insurance   against 
losses  by  fire,  accidents,  and  injuries  to  persons)  and 
an  annual   amount  sufficient  to  pay  at  or  before 
maturity  all  bonds  issued  on  account  of  said  under- 
taking, all  such  bonds  outstanding  shall  be  included 
in  determining  the  limitation  of  the  city's  power  to 
incur  indebtedness,  unless  the  principal  and  interest 
thereof  be  payable  exclusively  from  the  receipts  of 
such  undertaking.    The  City  Controller  shall  annually 
report  to  the  Council  in  detail  the  amount  of  the 
revenue  from  each  such  undertaking  and  whether 
there  is  any  and,  if  so,  what   deficit  in  meeting  the 
requirements  above  set  forth. 


272  Municipal  Program 

Provision  shall  be  made  at  the  time  of  their  issue 
for  raising  a  sum  of  money,  by  taxation,  sufficient  to 
pay,  as  it  falls  due,  the  interest  upon  all  city  bonds 
not  exclusively  payable  from  the  receipts  of  revenue- 
producing  undertakings,  and  to  pay  and  discharge 

the  principal  thereof  within  l  years  from  the 

date  of  their  issue;  but  whenever  in  any  year  the 
receipts  from  any  revenue-producing  undertaking 
shall  be  sufficient  to  pay  the  costs  of  operation  and 
administration  as  above  denned,  and  the  annual 
amount  hereinbefore  required,  the  tax  to  pay  the 
interest  and  provide  for  the  principal  of  the  bonds 
issued  for  such  undertaking  shall  not  be  collected, 
and  the  same  shall  be  paid  from  such  receipts. 

The  amount  to  be  raised  by  tax  for  city  purposes 
upon  real  and  personal  property  or  either  of  them, 
in  addition  to  providing  for  the  principal  and  interest 
of  the  then  outstanding  bonded  indebtedness  shall 

not  in  the  aggregate  exceed  in  any  one  year per 

centum  of  the  assessed  valuation  of  the  real  and 
personal  estate  subject  to  taxation  by  such  city,  to 
be  ascertained  as  hereinbefore  prescribed  in  respect 
to  the  city  debt.2 

»  This  period  should  not,  in  the  opinion  of  the  committee, 
exceed  thirty  years. 

2  Under  this  section  a  city  may  issue  long-term  bonds, 
establish  and  maintain  a  sinking  fund  sufficient  to  provide 
for  their  payment  at  maturity;  or  it  may  have  the  bonds  so 
drawn  that  a  certain  number  will  mature  each  year  and  be 
paid  from  the  tax  as  collected.  By  the  latter  method  the 
city  avoids  any  risk  incident  to  a  sinking  fund,  the  loss  of 
interest  on  money  not  invested,  any  premiums  it  might  pay 
to  buy  back  its  own  bonds,  and  the  abuses  incident  to  large 
accumulations  of  uninvested  money. 


Corporations  Act  273 

'  Sec.  15.     City  Accounts. 

Every  city  shall  keep  books  of  account.  It  shall 
also  make  stated  financial  reports  at  least  as  often 
as  once  a  year  to  the  1,  in  accordance  with  forms 
and  methods  prescribed  by  him,  which  shall  be 
applicable  to  all  cities  within  the  State.  Such  reports 
shall  be  certified  as  to  their  correctness  by  said  *  or 
by  some  competent  person  or  persons  appointed  by 
him;  they  shall  be  printed  as  a  part  of  the  public 
documents  of  the  State,  and  submitted  by  the  1  to 
the  Legislature  at  its  next  regular  session.  Such 
reports  shall  contain  an  accurate  statement,  in 
summarized  form  and  also  in  detail,  of  the  financial 
receipts  of  the  city  from  all  sources,  and  of  the  ex- 
penditures of  the  city  for  all  purposes,  together  with 
a  statement  in  detail  of  the  debt  of  said  city  at  the 
date  of  said  report,  and  of  the  purposes  for  which 
such  debt  has  been  incurred,  as  well  as  such  other 
information  as  may  be  required  by  1.  Said  1  shall 
have  power  by  himself  or  by  some  competent  person 
or  persons  appointed  by  him,  to  examine  into  the 
affairs  of  the  financial  department  of  any  city  within 
this  State.  On  every  such  examination  inquiry  shall 
be  made  as  to  the  financial  condition  and  resources 
of  the  city,  and  whether  the  requirements  of  the 
constitution  and  laws  have  been  complied  with,  and 
into  the  methods  and  accuracy  of  the  city's  accounts, 
and  as  to  such  other  matters  as  the  said  1  may 
prescribe.  The  1  and  every  such  examiner  appointed 
by  him,  shall  have  power  to  administer  an  oath  to 
any  person  whose  testimony  may  be  required  on 

>  State  Controller  or  other  officer,  or  board  which  may  ex- 
ercise supervision  over  municipal  finances. 


274  Municipal  Program 

any  such  examination,  and  to  compel  the  appearance 
and  attendance  of  any  such  person  for  the  purpose 
of  any  such  investigation  and  examination,  and  the 
production  of  books  and  papers.  Wilful  false  swearing 
in  such  examinations  shall  be  perjury,  and  punishable 
as  such.  A  report  of  each  such  examination  shall 
be  made,  and  shall  be  a  matter  of  public  record  in 
the  office  of  said  1 

Sec.  1 6.    Local  Authority  for  Execution  of  State  Laws. 

Within  its  corporate  limits  every  city  incorporated 
under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be  the  local 
agent  of  the  State  government  for  the  enforcement 
of  State  laws,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  other  public 
offices,  except  so  far  as  the  contrary  may  be  provided 
by  general  law  applicable  to  all  the  cities  of  the 
State.2 

Sec.  17.     State  Supervision. 

Every  city  incorporated  under  the  provisions  of 
this  Act  shall,  in  the  exercise  of  the  powers  hereby 
conferred,  be  subject  to  the  supervision  and  control  of 
such  State  administrative  boards  and  officers  as  may 
be  established  for  this  purpose  by  general  laws 
applicable  to  all  cities  of  the  State,  or  may  be  granted 
powers  of  supervision  and  control,  by  general  act  of 
the  Legislature  applicable  to  all  cities  within  the 
State.3 

1  State  Controller  or  other  officer,  or  board  which  may  exer- 
cise supervision  over  municipal  finances. 

2  For  example,  the  city,  as  a  corporation,  unless  there  were 
a  general  police  system  applicable  to  all  cities  in  the  State, 
would  be  under  this  section  intrusted  with  the  duty  of  preserv- 
ing the  peace. 

3  For  example,  the  State  Board  or  Superintendent  of  Edu- 
cation, the  State  Board  of  Health,  the  State  Board  of  Charities. 


Corporations  Act  275 

ARTICLE   III. 
THE  MAYOR. 

Section  i.     The  Term  of  Office. 

The  chief  executive  officer  of  the  city  shall  be  a 
Mayor,  who  shall  be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States, 
a  qualified  voter  residing  within  the  city  limits,  and 
shall  hold  his  office  for  two  years,1  and  until  his 
successor  is  elected  and  has  qualified. 

Sec.  2.     Filling  of  Vacancy. 

Whenever  a  vacancy  shall  occur  in  the  office  of 
the  Mayor,  the  President  of  the  Council  shall  act  as 
Mayor,  and  shall  possess  all  the  rights  and  powers 
of  the  Mayor,  and  perform  all  his  duties  until  the 
next  election,  and  until  his  successor  is  elected  and 
has  qualified. 

Sec.  3.     Disability  of  Mayor. 

During  the  temporary  absence  or  disability  of  the 
Mayor  the  President  of  the  Council  shall  act  as  Mayor 
pro  tempore,  and  during  such  absence  or  disability 

1  Compare  Art.  V.,  Sec.  i.  The  act  contemplates  a  six 
years'  term  for  a  member  of  the  Council,  one  third  of  the 
members  going  out  of  office  at  each  biennial  election.  The 
Mayor  is  thus  elected  at  the  same  time  as  one  third  of  the 
Council,  and  presumably  they  will  be  in  political  accord. 
The  Mayor  and  one  third  of  the  Council  have  great  power 
when  acting  together.  They  will  practically  control  the 
character  of  the  administration  in  many  important  respects. 

The  biennial  elections  will  enable  the  citizens  effectively 
to  review  the  conduct  of  the  city  administration;  and  the 
terms  of  office  fixed  by  the  Act  will  enable  the  dates  of  city 
elections  to  occur  on  the  usual  election  days  in  November 
in  years  alternating  with  State  and  National  elections,  as  is 
done  in  New  York,  thus  avoiding  two  elections  in  the  same 
year. 


276  Municipal  Program 

shall  possess  the  powers  of  the  Mayor  and  perform 
his  duties,  except  that  he  shall  not  appoint  or  remove 
from  office  any  person  in  the  administrative  service 
of  the  city  unless  such  absence  or  disability  continues 
for  a  period  of  at  least days. 

Sec.  4.     Removal  of  Mayor. 

In  case  of  misconduct,  inability  or  failure  properly 
to  perform  his  duties,  the  Mayor  may  be  removed 
from  office  by  the  Governor  of  the  State,  after  being 
given  an  opportunity  to  be  heard  in  his  defense. 

The  proceedings  upon  such  removal  shall  be  public, 
and  a  full  detailed  statement  of  the  reasons  for  such 
removal  shall  be  filed  by  the  Governor  in  the  office 
of  the  Secretary  of  State,  and  shall  be  a  matter  of 
public  record.  The  decision  of  the  Governor  when 
filed  with  the  reasons  therefor  shall  be  final.  And 
the  Governor  may,  pending  the  investigation,  suspend 
the  Mayor  for  a  period  of  thirty  days. 

Sec.  5.  Presence  of  Mayor  and  Heads  of  Depart- 
ments at  Council  Meetings. 

The  Mayor  and  the  heads  of  the  administrative 
departments  of  the  city  shall  have  the  right  to  be 
present  and  participate  in  the  proceedings  of  the 
Council,  but  not  to  vote.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
Mayor  and  of  each  of  the  heads  of  departments  to 
attend  the  meetings  of  the  Council  when  specifically 
requested  by  the  Council,  and  to  answer  such  ques- 
tions relative  to  the  affairs  of  the  city  under  his 
management  as  may  be  put  to  him  by  any  member 
of  the  Council. 

Sec.  6.     Veto  Power  of  Mayor. 

Every  ordinance  or  resolution  of  the  Council  shall, 
before  it  takes  effect,  be  presented  duly  certified  to 


Corporations  Act  277 

the  Mayor  for  his  approval.  The  Mayor  shall  return 
such  ordinance  or  resolution  to  the  Council  within 

days  after  receiving  it,  or  at  the  next  meeting 

of  the  Council  after  the  expiration  of  said days ; 

if  he  approve  it,  he  shall  sign  it;  and  if  he  disapprove 
it,  he  shall  specify  his  objections  thereto  in  writing. 
If  he  do  not  return  it  with  such  disapproval  within 
the  time  specified,  it  shall  take  effect  as  if  he  had 
approved  it.  In  case  of  disapproval,  the  ordinance 

or  resolution  may  be  again  passed  within days 

by  the  votes  of  at  least of  all  the  members 

elected  to  the  Council.  In  case  an  ordinance  or 
resolution  of  the  Council  shall  appropriate  money, 
the  Mayor  may  approve  one  or  more  of  the  items 
in  such  ordinance  or  resolution,  and  disapprove  the 
others.  In  such  case  those  which  he  shall  fail  to 
disapprove  shall  become  effective,  and  those  which 
he  shall  disapprove  shall  become  effective  only  if 
again  passed  as  above  provided. 

Sec.  7.     City  Budget. 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Mayor  from  time  to 
time  to  make  such  recommendations  to  the  Council 
as  he  may  deem  to  be  for  the  welfare  of  the  city, 

and  on  the  day  of  in  each  year  to 

submit  to  the  Council  the  annual  budget  of  current 
expenses  of  the  city,  any  item  in  which  may  be 
reduced  or  omitted  by  the  Council;  but  the  Council 
shall  not  increase  any  item  in  nor  the  total  of  said 
budget. 1 

»  The  purpose  of  this  provision  is  to  give  the  Mayor,  who 
is  the  head  of  the  administrative  service,  the  power  to  make 
up  the  annual  budget  of  current  expenses,  subject  to  the 
power  of  the  Council  to  reduce  but  not  to  increase  the  pro- 


278  Municipal  Program 

Sec.  8.     Compensation  of  Mayor. 

The  Mayor  of  any  city  incorporated  under  this 
Act  may  be  paid  a  salary,  the  amount  of  which  shall 
be  fixed  by  the  Council;  but  no  Council  shall  change 
the  salary  of  any  Mayor  after  his  election. 

ARTICLE   IV. 

\/THE  ADMINISTRATIVE  SERVICE 
OF  THE  CITY. 

Section  i .     Appointive  Officers. 

The  Mayor  shall  have  power  to  appoint  all  heads 
of  departments  in  the  administrative  service  of  the 
city,  except  the  City  Controller.  Subject  to  the 
restrictions  and  limitations  hereinafter  contained, 
the  Mayor  shall  have  power  to  appoint  all  officers 
and  employees  in  the  subordinate  administrative 
service  of  the  city,  and  to  fill  all  vacancies  therein, 
except  that  laborers  may  be  appointed  and  removed 
by  the  heads  of  departments  in  which  they  are 
employed. 

Sec.  2.     Civil-service  Commissioners. 

The  Mayor  shall  appoint  three  or  more  suitable 
persons  to  be  known  as  Municipal  Civil-service 
Commissioners,  who  shall  prescribe,  amend,  and 
enforce  regulations  for  appointment  to,  and  pro- 
motion in,  and  for  examinations  in  the  administrative 
service  of  the  city,  including  the  appointment  and 
employment  of  laborers  therein.  Such  Commissioners 
shall  not  hold  any  other  paid  position  in  the  public 

posed  appropriations.  Appropriations  for  other  purposes 
than  current  expenses  and  for  emergencies  are  provided  for 
in  Art.  V.,  Sec.  10. 


Corporations  Act  279 

service.  The  regulations  and  amendments  thereof 
made  under  the  authority  of  this  Act,  or  a  copy 
certified  by  the  Secretary  of  said  Commissioners, 
shall  be  received  in  evidence  in  all  courts  and  places. 

Sec.  3.     Civil-service  Regulations. 

Such  regulations  shall,  among  other  things,  pro- 
vide: 

1.  For  the  classification  of  the  offices,  places,  and 
employments  in  the  administrative  service  of  the 
city. 

Such  classification  shall  be  based  on  the  respective 
duties  and  functions  of  the  offices  and  positions 
affected,  and  on  the  amounts  of  the  salary  or  other 
compensation  attached  thereto,  and  shall  be  arranged 
so  as  to  permit  the  grading  of  offices  and  positions 
like  in  character  in  groups  and  subdivisions,  and  so 
as  to  permit  the  filling  of  offices  and  positions  in  the 
higher  grades,  so  far  as  practicable,  through  pro- 
motion. 

2.  For    examinations,    wherever    practicable,    to 
ascertain  the  fitness  of  all  applicants  for  appointment 
to  the  administrative  service  of  said  city.     Public 
notice  shall  be  given  of  all  examinations,  and  the 
Commissioners  shall  adopt  reasonable  rules  for  per- 
mitting the  presence  of  representatives  of  the  press. 

No  question  in  any  examination  under  the  regula- 
tions established  as  aforesaid  shall  relate  to  political 
or  religious  opinions,  affiliations  or  services,  and  no 
appointment  or  selection  to  or  removal  from  any 
office  or  employment  within  the  scope  of  the  regula- 
tions established  as  aforesaid,  and  no  transfer,  pro- 
motion, reduction,  reward,  or  punishment  shall  be  in 
any  manner  affected  or  influenced  by  such  opinions, 


280  Municipal  Program 

affiliations,  or  services.  Such  examinations  shall  be 
practical  in  their  character,  and  shall  relate  to  those 
matters  which  will  fairly  test  the  relative  fitness  of 
the  persons  examined  to  discharge  the  duties  of  the 
positions  to  which  they  seek  to  be  appointed.  Such 
examinations,  save  in  the  case  of  applicants  for 
employment  as  ordinary  (not  skilled)  laborers,  shall 
be  open,  competitive  examinations,  except  where, 
after  due  efforts  by  previous  public  advertisement 
or  other  effort  in  case  of  extraordinary  emergency, 
competition  is  found  not  to  be  practicable.  The 
examination  of  applicants  for  employment  as  ordinary 
laborers  shall  relate  to  their  capacity  for  labor  and 
their  habits  as  to  industry  and  sobriety,  and  shall  be 
accompanied  by  such  physical  examination  and 
tests,  competitive  or  otherwise,  as  the  Commission, 
in  its  discretion,  may  determine. 

3.  For  the  filling  of  vacancies  in  the  offices,  places, 
and  employments  in  the  administrative  service  of 
the  city  which  are  subject  to  competitive  examination 
by  selection  from  a  number  not  exceeding  three 
graded  highest  as  the  result  of  such  examination; 
and  for  the  selection  of  laborers,  from  among  those 
found  qualified,  on  the  basis  of  priority  of  application. 

In  the  absence  of  an  appropriate  eligible  list,  from 
which  appoinments  are  to  be  made,  and  pending 
the  preparation  of  siich  list,  any  office,  place,  or 
employment  subject  to  competitive  examination  may 
be  filled  temporarily  without  such  examination,  but 
not  for  a  longer  period  than  thirty  days.  No  person 
shall  be  appointed  or  employed  under  any  title  not 
appropriate  to  the  duties  to  be  performed,  and  no 
person  shall  be  transferred  to,  or  assigned  to  perform 


Corporations  Act  281 

the  duties  of,  any  position  subject  to  competitive 
examination,  unless  he  shall  have  been  appointed  to 
the  position  from  which  transfer  is  made  as  the 
result  of  an  open,  competitive  examination  equiv- 
alent to  that  required  for  the  position  to  be  filled, 
or  unless  he  shall  have  served  with  fidelity  for  at 
least  five  years  in  a  similar  position.  A  copy  of  each 
list  of  eligibles,  with  their  respective  grades,  shall 
be  accessible  to  each  person  whose  name  appears 
upon  such  list. 

4.  For  a  period  of  probation  not  exceeding  three 
months  before  an  appointment   or  employment   is 
made  permanent. 

5.  For  promotion  from  the  lower  grades  to  the 
higher  based  on  merit  and  competition  and  seniority 
of  service. 

An  increase  in  the  salary  or  other  compensation 
of  any  person  holding  an  office,  place,  or  employment 
within  the  scope  of  the  rules  in  force  hereunder  shall 
be  deemed  a  promotion. 

No  public  officer  or  employee  shall  be  deemed  or 
held  to  be  excluded  from  the  operation  of  this  Act, 
or  from  competitive  examination,  nor  shall  com- 
petitive examination  be  deemed  or  held  to  be  im- 
practicable, on  the  ground  or  for  the  reason  that  any 
office,  place,  or  employment  or  any  of  the  duties 
thereof,  is  confidential  in  character,  or  by  reason  of 
the  fact  that  fiduciary  responsibility  is  involved,  or 
by  reason  of  the  fact  that  any  bond  or  security  is 
or  shall  be  required  of  the  appointee;  provided, 
however,  that  in  advance  of  any  competitive  ex- 
amination for  any  office,  place,  or  employment,  the 
appointing  officer  may,  where  otherwise  permitted  by 


282  Municipal  Program 

law,  publicly  prescribe  the  amount  and  the  necessary 
details  of  the  bond  or  security  which  shall  be  required 
to  be  given  by  any  such  appointee,  and  provided 
further  that  any  surety  company,  the  bonds  of 

which  are  accepted  by  a  Justice  of  • 

Court,  shall  be  a  sufficient  surety  on  any  such  bond. 

Sec.  4.     Reports  of  Civil-service  Commissioners. 

The  Municipal  Civil-service  Commissioners  shall 
have  authority  to  employ  a  secretary  and  such  other 
assistance  as  may  be  necessary  for  the  performance 
of  their  duties  as  provided  in  this  Act,  and  shall  make 
reports  from  time  to  time  to  the  Mayor,  whenever 
said  Mayor  may  request,  of  the  manner  in  which 
the  regulations  hereinbefore  provided  for  have  been 
and  are  administered,  and  the  result  of  their  adminis- 
tration in  such  city,  and  of  such  other  matters  as 
said  Mayor  may  require,  and  annually,  and  on  or  before 

the  day  of  in  each  year,  shall  make  a 

report  to  the  Mayor;  and  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  Mayor  to  transmit  either  these  reports,  or  a 
sufficient  abstract  or  summary  thereof  to  give  full 
and  clear  information  as  to  their  contents,  to  the 
Council  annually  on  or  before  the day  of . 

Sec.  5.     Duty  of  Officers  to  Obey  Regulations. 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  persons  in  the  public 
service  of  the  city  to  conform  to  and  comply  with 
said  regulations  and  any  modifications  thereof  made 
pursuant  to  the  authority  of  this  Act,  and  to  aid  and 
facilitate  in  all  proper  ways  the  enforcement  of  said 
regulations  and  any  modifications  thereof,  and  the 
holding  of  all  examinations  which  may  be  required 
under  the  authority  of  this  Act  by  said  regulations. 
Proper  provision  shall  be  made  in  the  annual  budget 


Corporations  Act  283 

for  all  the  expenses  of  the  Municipal  Civil-service 
Commissioners. 

Sec.  6.  Roster  of  Administrative  Service.  Payment 
of  Public  Employees.  Action  to  Restrain  or  Recover 
Illegal  Payments. 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  Civil-service  Commis- 
sioners to  prepare,  continue,  and  keep  in  their  office  f 
a  complete  roster  of  all  persons  other  than  ordinary  / 
laborers  in  the  public  service  of  the  city.  This  roster 
shall  be  open  to  inspection  at  all  reasonable  hours. 
It  shall  show  in  reference  to  each  of  said  persons  his 
name,  the  date  of  his  appointment  to  or  employment 
in  such  service,  his  salary  or  compensation,  the  title 
of  the  place  or  office  he  holds,  the  nature  of  the 
duties  thereof,  and  the  date  of  any  termination  of 
such  service.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  all  officers  of 
the  city  to  give  to  the  Civil-service  Commissioners 
all  the  information  which  may  be  reasonably  re- 
quested, or  which  the  regulations  established  by  the 
Civil-service  Commissioners  may  require  in  aid  of 
the  preparation  or  continuance  of  said  roster,  and  so 
far  as  practicable  said  roster  shall  state  whether  any 
and  what  persons  are  holding  any  and  what  offices 
or  places  aforesaid  in  violation  of  this  act  or  of  any 
regulations  made  thereunder.  Said  Civil-service 
Commissioners  shall  have  access  to  all  public  records 
and  papers,  the  examination  of  which  will  aid  the 
discharge  of  their  duty  in  connection  with  said 
roster.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  Commissioners 
to  certify  to  the  City  Controller  the  name  of  each 
person  appointed  or  employed  in  the  public  service 
of  the  city  (ordinary  laborers  excepted),  stating  in 
each  case  the  title  or  character  of  the  office  or  em- 


284  Municipal  Program 

ployment,  the  date  of  the  commencement  of  service 
by  virtue  thereof,  and  the  salary  or  other  compen- 
sation paid,  and  also,  as  far  as  practicable,  the  name 
of  each  person  employed  in  violation  of  this  Act  or 
of  the  regulations  established  thereunder,  and  to 
certify  to  the  said  Controller  in  like  manner  every 
change  occurring  in  any  office  or  employment  of  the 
public  service  of  the  city  forthwith  on  the  occurrence 
of  the  change.  No  officer  of  said  city  whose  duty  it 
is  to  sign  or  countersign  warrants  shall  draw,  sign, 
countersign,  or  issue,  or  authorize  the  drawing, 
signing,  or  issuing  of  any  warrant  or  order  on  any 
disbursing  officer  of  the  city  for  the  payment  of 
salary  or  compensation  to  any  person  in  its  public 
service  required  to  be  so  certified  as  aforesaid  who 
is  not  so  certified  as  having  been  appointed  or  em- 
ployed in  pursuance  of  this  Act  or  of  the  regulations 
in  force  thereunder.  Any  person  entitled  to  be 
certified  as  aforesaid  may  maintain  a  proceeding  by 
mandamus  to  compel  the  issue  of  such  certificate. 
Any  sums  paid  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  this 
section  may  be  recovered  from  any  disbursing  officer 
of  the  city  paying  the  same  or  signing,  countersigning, 
drawing,  or  issuing,  or  authorizing  the  drawing, 
signing,  or  issuing  of  any  warrant  or  order  for  the 
payment  thereof,  and  from  the  sureties  on  his  official 

bond  in  an  action  in  the Court.  All  moneys 

recovered  in  any  action  brought  under  the  provisions 
of  this  section  must,  when  collected,  after  paying  all 
expenses  of  such  action,  be  paid  into  the  city  treasury. 

Sec.  7.  Records  of  Civil-service  Commissioners. 
Their  Duty  to  enforce  Regulations. 

The  said  Commissioners  shall  keep  records  of  their 


Corporations  Act  285 

proceedings;  they  shall  make  regulations  for  and 
have  control  of  such  applications,  registrations, 
certifications,  and  examinations  as  are  or  may  be 
provided  for  under  this  Act  and  the  regulations 
established  under  their  authority,  and  shall  cause 
a  record  thereof  to  be  kept  and  of  the  markings  and 
gradings  upon  such  examinations;  and  all  recom- 
mendations of  applicants  for  office  or  employment 
received  by  them,  or  by  any  officer  having  authority 
to  make  appointments  or  select  employees  in  the 
public  service  as  classified  by  said  Commissioners, 
shall  be  kept  and  preserved  by  said  Commissioners. 
And  all  such  records  and  regulations  shall,  subject 
to  such  reasonable  regulations  as  may  be  made  by 
said  Commissioners,  be  open  to  public  inspection. 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Civil-service  Commis- 
sioners to  supervise  the  execution  of  this  law  and 
the  regulations  thereunder,  and  to  see  that  the  same 
be  enforced,  and  they  shall  be  responsible  for  correct- 
ing all  abuses  and  irregularities  occurring  in  the 
administration  of  said  law  and  the  regulations  there- 
under, and  shall  investigate  all  complaints  in  respect 
of  such  abuses  and  irregularities  made  to  them. 
They  shall  supervise  the  examinations  thereunder 
and  the  markings  and  gradings  upon  such  examina- 
tions, and  shall  keep  themselves  well  informed 
concerning  the  same  in  all  parts  of  the  public  ser- 
vice to  the  end  that  such  examinations,  markings, 
and  gradings  shall  be  as  uniform  and  just  as 
possible. 

Sec.  8.  Power  of  Civil-service  Commissioners  to 
Investigate. 

A  majority  of  said  Commissioners  shall  constitute  a 


286  Municipal  Program 

quorum.  The  said  Commissioners  may  make  inves- 
tigations concering  the  facts  in  respect  to  the  exe- 
cution of  this  Act,  and  of  the  regulations  established 
under  its  authority,  and  in  the  course  of  such  investi- 
gations each  Commissioner  and  their  secretary  and 
such  other  assistant  as  they  may  designate  shall  have 
the  power  to  administer  oaths.  Said  Commissioners 
shall  have  power,  for  the  purposes  provided  for  in  this 
Act,  to  examine  into  books  and  records,  compel  the 
production  of  books  and  papers,  subpoena  witnesses, 
administer  oaths  to  them,  and  compel  their  attendance 
and  examination,  as  though  such  subpoena  had 
issued  from  a  court  of  record  of  this  State ;  and  wit- 
nesses and  officers  to  subpoena  and  secure  the  attend- 
ance of  witnesses  before  the  said  Commissioners, 
shall  be  entitled  to  the  same  fees  as  are  allowed  to 
witnesses  in  civil  cases  in  courts  of  record.  Such 
fees  need  not  be  prepaid,  but  the  proper  disbursing 
officer  of  the  city  shall  pay  the  amount  thereof  when 
the  same  shall  have  been  certified  by  the  president 
of  the  Commissioners,  and  duly  proved  by  affidavit 
or  otherwise  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  said  officer; 
and  all  officers  in  the  public  service  and  their  deputies, 
clerks,  subordinates,  and  employees  shall  afford  the 
said  Commissioners  all  reasonable  facilities  in  conduct- 
ing their  inquiries  specified  in  this  Act,  and  give  in- 
spection to  said  Commissioners  of  all  books,  papers, 
and  documents  belonging  or  in  anywise  appertaining 
to  their  respective  offices,  and  also  shall  produce  said 
books  and  papers,  and  shall  attend  and  testify  when 
required  to  do  so  by  said  Commissioners.  Wilful 
false  swearing  in  such  investigations  and  examinations 
shall  be  perjury  and  punishable  as  such. 


Corporations  Act  287 

Sees.  9-15.  Specific  Prohibitions  and  Penalties 
under  the  Civil-service  Provisions  of  the  Act. 

Sec.  9.  Any  commissioner,  examiner,  or  any  other 
person  who  shall  wilfully  or  corruptly,  by  himself  or 
in  co-operation  with  one  or  more  persons,  defeat, 
deceive,  or  obstruct  any  person  in  respect  to  his  or 
her  right  to  examination  or  registration  according 
to  any  regulations  prescribed  pursuant  to  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act,  or  who  shall,  wilfully  or  corruptly, 
falsely  mark,  grade,  estimate,  or  report  upon  the 
examination  or  proper  standing  of  any  person  ex- 
amined, registered,  or  certified  according  to  any 
regulations  prescribed  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of 
this  Act,  or  aid  in  so  doing,  or  who  shall  wilfully  or 
corruptly  make  any  false  representations  concerning 
the  same,  or  concerning  the  person  examined,  regis- 
tered, or  certified,  or  who  shall  wilfully  or  corruptly 
furnish  to  any  person  any  special  or  secret  information 
for  the  purpose  of  either  improving  or  injuring  the 
prospects  or  chances  of  any  person  so  examined, 
registered,  or  certified,  or  to  be  examined,  registered, 
or  certified,  or  who  shall  personate  any  other  person, 
or  permit  or  aid  in  any  manner  any  other  person  to 
personate  him,  in  connection  with  any  examination 
or  registration  or  application  or  request  to  be  ex- 
amined or  registered,  shall  for  each  offense  be  deemed 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor. 

Sec.  10.  No  person  in  the  national  public  service 
or  the  public  service  of  the  State  or  any  civil  division 
thereof,  including  counties,  cities,  towns,  villages, 
and  boroughs,  shall,  directly  or  indirectly,  use  his 
authority  or  official  influence  to  compel  or  induce  any 
person  in  the  public  service  of  a  city  to  pay  or  to  prom- 


288  Municipal  Program 

ise  to  pay  any  political  assessment,  subscription,  or 
contribution.  Every  person  who  may  have  charge 
or  control  in  any  building,  office,  or  room,  occupied 
for  any  purpose  of  said  public  service  of  a  city  is 
hereby  authorized  to  prohibit  the  entry  of  any  person 
into  the  same,  and  he  shall  not  knowingly  permit  any 
person  to  enter  the  same  for  the  purpose  of  therein 
making,  collecting,  receiving,  or  giving  notice  of  any 
political  assessment,  subscription,  or  contribution, 
and  no  person  shall  enter  or  remain  in  any  said  office, 
building,  or  room,  or  send  or  direct  any  letter  or  other 
writing  thereto  for  the  purpose  of  giving  notice  of, 
demanding,  or  collecting,  nor  shall  any  person  therein 
give  notice  of,  demand,  collect,  or  receive  any  such 
assessment,  subscription,  or  contribution;  and  no 
person  shall  prepare  or  make  out,  or  take  part  in 
preparing  or  making  out,  any  political  assessment,  sub- 
scription, or  contribution  with  the  intent  that  the  same 
shall  be  sent  or  presented  to,  or  collected  from  any 
person  in  the  public  service  of  the  city,  and  no  person 
shall  knowingly  send  or  present  any  political  assess- 
ment, subscription,  or  contribution  to  or  request  its 
payment  by  any  person  in  said  public  service. 

Any  person  who  shall  be  guilty  of  violating  any 
provision  of  this  section  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a 
misdemeanor. 

Sec.  ii.  Whoever,  being  a  public  officer  or  being 
in  nomination  for,  or  while  seeking  a  nomination  or 
appointment  for,  any  public  office,  shall  use,  or 
promise  to  use,  whether  directly  or  indirectly,  any 
official  authority  or  influence  (whether  then  possessed 
or  merely  anticipated)  in  the  way  of  conferring  upon 
any  person,  or  in  order  to  secure  or  aid  any  person  to 


Corporations  Act  289 

secure  any  office  or  appointment  in  the  public  service, 
or  any  nomination,  confirmation,  or  promotion,  or 
increase  of  salary,  upon  the  consideration  or  condition 
that  the  vote  or  political  influence  or  action  of  the 
last-named  person  or  any  other  shall  be  given  or  used 
in  behalf  of  any  candidate,  officer,  or  political  party 
or  association,  or  upon  any  other  corrupt  condition  or 
consideration,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  bribery  or 
an  attempt  at  bribery.  And  whoever,  being  a  public 
officer  or  employee,  or  having  or  claiming  to  have  any 
authority  or  influence  for  or  affecting  the  nomination, 
public  employment,  confirmation,  promotion,  re- 
moval or  increase  or  decrease  of  salary  of  any  public 
officer  or  employee,  shall  corruptly  use,  or  promise  or 
threaten  to  use,  any  such  authority  or  influence, 
directly  or  indirectly,  in  order  to  coerce  or  persuade 
the  vote  or  political  action  of  any  citizen,  or  the 
removal,  discharge,  or  promotion  of  any  public 
officer  or  public  employee,  or  upon  any  other  corrupt 
consideration,  shall  be  also  guilty  of  bribery,  or  an 
attempt  at  bribery.  And  every  person  found  guilty 
of  such  bribery,  or  an  attempt  to  commit  the  same,  as 
aforesaid,  shall,  upon  conviction  thereof,  be  liable 
to  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  one  hundred 
dollars  or  more  than  three  thousand  dollars,  or  to  be 
imprisoned  not  less  than  ten  days  or  more  than  two 
years,  or  to  both  said  fine  and  said  imprisonment,  in 
the  discretion  of  the  court.  If  the  person  convicted 
be  a  public  officer  he  shall,  in  addition  to  any  other 
punishment  imposed,  be  deprived  of  his  office  and  be 

ineligible  to  any  public  office  or  employment  for 

years  thereafter.  The  phrase  "public  officer"  shall 
be  held  to  include  all  public  officials  in  this  State, 


Municipal  Program 

whether  paid  directly  or  indirectly  from  the  public 
treasury  of  the  State,  or  from  that  of  any  civil  division 
thereof,  including  counties,  cities,  towns,  villages, 
and  boroughs,  and  whether  by  fees  or  otherwise ;  and 
the  phrase  "public  employee"  shall  be  held  to  include 
every  person  not  being  an  officer  who  is  paid  from  any 
said  treasury. 

Sec.  12.  No  recommendation  of  any  person  who 
shall  apply  for  office  or  place,  or  for  examination  or 
registration  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  or  the 
regulations  established  under  the  authority  thereof, 
except  as  to  residence  and  as  to  character,  and  in  the 
case  of  former  employers  as  to  the  abilities,  when  said 
recommendation  as  to  character  and  abilities  is 
specifically  required  by  said  regulations,  shall  be 
given  to  or  considered  by  any  person  concerned  in 
making  any  examination,  registration,  appointment, 
or  promotion  under  this  Act  or  under  the  regulations 
established  under  the  authority  thereof.  No  recom- 
mendation or  question  under  the  authority  of  this 
Act  shall  relate  to  the  political  or  religious  opinions 
or  affiliations  of  any  person  whomsoever. 

Sec.  13.  No  person  in  the  service  of  the  city  is  for 
that  reason  under  any  obligation  to  contribute  to  any 
political  fund  or  to  render  any  political  service,  and 
no  person  shall  be  removed,  reduced  in  grade  or  salary, 
or  otherwise  prejudiced  for  refusing  to  do  so.  No 
person  in  the  service  of  the  city  shall  discharge,  or 
promote,  or  degrade,  or  in  any  manner  change  the 
official  rank  or  compensation  of  any  other  person  in 
said  service,  or  promise  or  threaten  to  do  so  for  giving 
or  withholding,  or  neglecting  to  make  any  contribution 
of  money  or  service  or  any  other  valuable  thing 


Corporations  Act  291 

for  any  political  purpose.  No  person  in  said  service 
shall  use  his  official  authority  or  influence  to  coerce 
the  political  action  of  any  person  or  body,  or  to  affect 
or  interfere  with  any  nomination,  appointment,  or 
election  to  public  office. 

Sec.  14.  Whoever,  after  a  regulation  has  been  duly 
established  according  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act, 
makes  an  appointment  to  office  in  the  public  service 
of  the  city  or  selects  a  person  for  employment  therein 
contrary  to  the  provisions  of  such  regulation,  or 
wilfully  refuses  or  neglects  otherwise  to  comply  with, 
or  conform  to,  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  or  violates  any 
of  such  provisions,  shall  be  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor. 

Sec.  15.     Misdemeanors  under  the  provisions  of  this 

Act  shall  be  punishable  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than 

dollars  nor  more  than dollars, 

or  by  imprisonment  for  not  longer  than ,  or 

by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment. 

Sec.  1 6.     Power  of  Removal. 

No  officer  or  employee  in  the  administrative  service 
of  the  city  shall  be  removed,  reduced  in  grade  or 
salary,  or  transferred  because  of  the  religious  or 
political  beliefs  or  opinions  of  such  officer  or  employee ; 
nor  shall  any  official  in  the  administrative  service 
of  the  city  be  removed,  reduced,  or  transferred  with- 
out first  having  received  a  written  statement  setting 
forth  in  detail  the  reasons  therefor;  a  duplicate  copy 
of  such  statement  shall  be  filed  in  the  office  of  the 
Civil-service  Commissioners,  and  at  the  option  of  the 
official  who  shall  have  been  removed,  reduced,  or 
transferred,  such  statement  of  reasons,  together  with 
the  reply  thereto  made  by  the  officer  removed,  shall 
be  made  a  matter  of  public  record  in  the  archives 


292  Municipal  Program 

of  the  city.  Subject  to  the  foregoing  provisions  of  this 
Act,  all  persons  in  the  administrative  service  of  the 
city  shall  hold  their  offices  without  fixed  terms  and 
subject  to  the  pleasure  of  the  Mayor. 

Sec.  17.     Mayor  May  Investigate. 

The  Mayor  may  at  any  time,  with  or  without 
notice,  investigate  in  person  or  by  agent  or  agents 
appointed  by  him  for  this  purpose,  the  affairs  of  any 
department  of  the  city  government,  and  the  official 
acts  and  conduct  of  any  official  in  the  administrative 
service  of  the  city.  For  the  purpose  of  ascertaining 
facts  in  connection  with  these  examinations,  the 
Mayor  or  the  agent  or  agents  so  appointed  by  him 
shall  have  full  power  to  compel  the  attendance  and 
testimony  of  witnesses,  to  administer  oaths,  and  to 
examine  such  persons  as  they  shall  deem  necessary, 
and  to  compel  the  production  of  books  and  papers. 
Wilful  false  swearing  in  such  investigations  and 
examinations  shall  be  perjury,  and  punishable  as 
such. 

ARTICLE  V. 
THE  COUNCIL. 

Section  i.     Council  to  Exercise  Municipal  Powers. 

There  shall  be  a  City  Council  which  shall  have  full 
power  and  authority,  except  as  otherwise  provided, 
to  exercise  all  powers  conferred  upon  the  city,  subject 
to  the  veto  of  the  Mayor,  as  hereinbefore  provided. 

Sec.  2.     Composition  of  the  Council. 

The  Council  shall  consist  of  1  members,  who 

»  At  least  nine  and  not  more  than  fifty,  the  precise  number 
being  determined  by  the  local  conditions  of  each  State. 


Corporations  Act  293 

shall  serve  without  pay,  one  third  of  whom  shall  be 
elected  at  each  municipal  election.  The  members 
of  the  Council  shall  be  elected  on  a  general  ticket 

from  the  city  at  large,  and  shall  serve  from after 

their  election.  The  members  of  the  first  Council 
elected  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  be 
divided  by  lot  into  three  classes,  as  nearly  equal  in 
number  as  may  be,  to  hold  office  respectively  for 
two,  four,  and  six  years,  and  thereafter  at  each  muni- 
cipal election  there  shall  be  elected  members  of  the 
Council  to  take  the  place  of  outgoing  members  for 
a  term  of  six  years,  and  to  fill  for  the  unexpired  term 
any  vacancies  that  may  have  occurred  in  the  respec- 
tive classes. l  Outgoing  members  of  the  Council  shall 
be  eligible  for  re-election. 

Sec.  3.  The  Council  to  be  Judge  of  Election  and 
Qualifications  of  its  own  Members. 

The  Council  shall  be  the  judge  of  the  election  and 
qualifications  of  its  own  members,  subject  to  review 
by  the  courts. 

Sec.  4.     Ineligibility  of  Councilors. 

No  member  of  the  Council  shall  hold  any  other 
public  office  or  hold  any  office  or  employment  the 
compensation  for  which  is  paid  out  of  public  moneys ; 
or  be  elected  or  appointed  to  any  office  created  or  the 
compensation  of  which  is  increased  by  the  Council 

i  In  States  where  the  conditions  make  it  practicable  to  hold 
two  elections  at  different  times  in  the  same  year  without  sub- 
ordinating local  questions  to  issues  of  national  or  State 
politics,  and  the  interest  of  the  voters  in  public  affairs  can  be 
sufficiently  aroused  to  permit  two  vigorous  political  campaigns 
in  the  same  year,  the  term  of  a  member  of  the  Council  could 
be  made  three  years,  one  third  of  the  Council  being  elected 
each  year. 


294  Municipal  Program 

while  he  was  a  member  thereof,  until  one  year  after 
the  expiration  of  the  term  for  which  he  was  elected; 
or  be  interested  directly  or  indirectly  in  any  contract 
with  the  city ;  or  be  in  the  employ  of  any  person  having 
any  contract  with  the  city,  or  of  any  grantee  of  a 
franchise  granted  by  the  city. 

Sec.  5.  The  Council  Shall  Elect  Its  Own  Officers 
and  Determine  Its  Own  Rules. 

The  Council  shall  elect  its  own  officers;  determine 
its  own  rules  of  procedure;  may  punish  its  members 
for  disorderly  conduct,  and  compel  the  attendance 

of  members,  and,  with  the  concurrence  of of  the 

members  elected,  expel  a  member.  Any  member 
who  shall  have  been  convicted  of  bribery  shall  thereby 
forfeit  his  office. 

Sec.  6.     Quorum  of  the  Council. 

A  majority  of  the  members  of  the  Council  elected 
shall  constitute  a  quorum  to  do  business,  but  a  smaller 
number  may  adjourn  from  time  to  time,  and  may 
compel  the  attendance  of  absentees  under  such  penal- 
ties as  may  be  prescribed  by  ordinance. 

Sec.  7.     Council  Meetings. 

The  Council  may  prescribe  by  ordinance  the  time 
and  place  of  its  meetings  and  the  manner  in  which 
special  meetings  thereof  may  be  called.  But  the 
Mayor  may  call  a  special  meeting  of  the  Council  at 
any  time  by  previous  written  notice  mailed  to  the 
post-office  address  of  each  member  of  the  Council  at 
least  twenty-four  hours  before  such  special  meeting. 
The  Council  shall  elect  one  of  its  own  number  as 
president,  shall  sit  with  open  doors,  shall  keep  a 
journal  of  its  own  proceedings,  which  shall  be  public 
and  printed.  All  sessions  of  committees  of  the 


Corporations  Act  295 

Council  shall  be  public.  The  Council  shall  act  only 
by  ordinance  or  resolution,  and  all  ordinances  or 
resolutions,  except  ordinances  making  appropriations, 
shall  be  confined  to  one  subject,  which  shall  be  clearly 
expressed  in  the  title,  and  ordinances  making  appro- 
priations shall  be  confined  to  the  subject  of  appropria- 
tions. The  ayes  and  nays  shall  be  taken  upon  the 
passage  of  all  ordinances  or  resolutions  and  entered 
upon  the  journal  of  its  proceedings;  and  every  or- 
dinance or  resolution  shall  require  on  final  passage 
the  affirmative  votes  of  a  majority  of  all  the  members. 
No  ordinance  or  resolution  shall  be  passed  finally 
on  the  day  it  is  introduced,  except  in  case  of  public 
emergency,  and  then  only  when  requested  by  the 
Mayor  and  approved  by  the  affirmative  votes  of  three 
fourths  of  all  the  members  of  the  Council. 

Except  in  case  of  such  public  emergency,  each 
ordinance  when  introduced  shall  be  referred  to  a 
committee  and  printed  for  the  use  of  members,  and 
shall  not  be  subsequently  so  altered  or  amended  as  to 
change  its  original  purpose.  It  shall  be  reported  to 
the  Council  at  the  next  regular  meeting  thereof, 
unless  another  date  be  designated  by  the  Council 
when  the  reference  is  made,  or  at  a  subsequent  meet- 
ing thereof. 

Before  any  grant  of  a  franchise  shall  be  made,  the 
proposed  specific  grant  embodied  in  the  form  of  an 
ordinance,  with  all  the  terms  and  conditions,  including 
the  provisions  as  to  rates,  fares,  and  charges,  shall 
be  published  at  the  expense  of  the  applicant  for  the 
franchise  at  least  twice  in  each  of  two  newspapers 
designated  by  the  Mayor  having  a  general  circulation 
in  the  city.  Such  publication  shall  take  place  at 


296  Municipal  Program 

least days  before  the  final  vote  upon  such  or- 
dinance, and  such  ordinance  shall  require  the  affirma- 
tive vote  of  at  least >of  all  the  members  of  the 

Council. 

Sec.  8.     Council  May  Establish  Municipal  Offices. 

The  Council,  except  as  herein  before  provided,  shall 
have  power  to  establish  any  office  that  may  in  its 
opinion  be  necessary  or  expedient  for  the  conduct  of 
the  city's  business  or  government,  and  may  fix  its 
salary  and  duties;  but  no  city  official  shall  be  elected 
by  popular  vote  except  the  Mayor  and  the  members 
of  the  Council.  The  incumbents  of  all  offices  estab- 
lished by  the  Council  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Mayor, 
as  herein  provided,  except  that  the  Council  may  elect 
its  own  officers. 

Sec.  9.     The  Council's  Powers  of  Investigation. 

The  Council,  or  a  committee  of  the  Council  duly 
authorized  by  it  may  investigate  any  department  of 
the  city  government  and  the  official  acts  and  conduct 
of  any  city  officer ;  and  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining 
facts  in  connection  with  such  investigation,  shall  have 
full  power  to  compel  the  attendance  and  testimony  of 
witnesses,  to  administer  oaths,  and  to  examine  such 
persons  as  it  may  deem  necessary,  and  to  compel  the 
production  of  books  and  documents.  Wilful  false 
swearing  in  such  investigations  and  examinations 
shall  be  perjury  and  punishable  as  such. 

Sec.  10.  Council's  Power  to  Regulate  Assessments, 
Levy  Taxes  and  Make  Appropriations. 

The  Council  shall  provide  by  general  ordinance  for 
the  appraisement  and  assessment  of  all  property 
subject  to  taxation  and  for  the  collection  and  enforce- 
ment of  taxes  and  assessments  and  for  penalties  for 


Corporations  Act  297 

non-payment  thereof.  Such  taxes,  assessments  and 
penalties  shall  be  a  lien  upon  the  property  affected 
thereby  until  paid. 

All  taxes  shall  be  levied  and  appropriations  made 
annually,  not  more  than  sixty  days  nor  less  than 
thirty  days  before  the  date  for  holding  municipal 
elections,  except  such  taxes  as  may  be  levied  and 
appropriations  as  may  be  made  to  provide  for  debts 
already  incurred  or  continuing  contracts  already 
entered  into.  And  except,  also,  in  cases  of  emergency, 
when  on  a  certificate  signed  by  the  Mayor  and  Con- 
troller that  such  emergency  exists,  a  special  appro- 
priation may  be  made  to  meet  the  same. 

Subject  to  the  foregoing,  and  other  provisions  of  this 
Act,  the  Council  shall  have  the  power  to  appropriate 
all  money  necessary  to  provide  for  the  expenses  of  the 
city  government,  to  make  special  appropriations,  and 
to  transfer  to  a  different  appropriation  the  unexpended 
balance  of  an  appropriation  already  made,  and  not 
needed  for  the  completion  of  the  work  for  which  such 
appropriation  was  originally  made. 

Sec  .11.  Direct  Legislation;  Minority  or  Proportional 
or  Other  Form  of  Representation  in  City  Elections. 

The  Council  of  any  city  now  existing  or  hereafter 
created  within  the  State  may,  with  the  consent  of  a 
majority  of  the  qualified  voters  of  the  city  voting 
thereon  at  the  next  ensuing  city  election  taking  place 

not  less  than days  thereafter,  establish  a  method 

of  direct  legislation  so  that  qualified  voters  of  the  city 
may  submit  and  a  majority  thereof  voting  thereon 
may  decide  by  direct  vote  propositions  relative  to 
city  matters,  and  may  also  in  the  same  manner 
establish  minority  or  proportional  or  other  method 


298  Municipal  Program 

of  representation  as  to  elections  to  elective  city 
offices. 

On  a  petition  therefor,  filed  in  the  office  of  the 
Mayor,  signed  by  qualified  voters  of  the  city  equal  in 
number  to  two  percent,  (which  shall  not  be  less  than 
one  thousand)  of  those  voting  at  the  last  preceding 
city  election,  a  proposition  to  establish  a  method  of 
direct  legislation  or  to  establish  minority  or  propor- 
tional or  other  method  of  representation  as  to  elections 
to  elective  city  offices,  must  be  submitted  to  the 
qualified  voters  of  the  city  at  the  next  ensuing  city 

election  occurring  at  least days  thereafter ;  if  a 

majority  of  such  voters  voting  upon  such  proposition 
are  in  favor  thereof,  such  proposition  shall  go  at  once 
into  effect. 

ARTICLE  VI. 
THE  CONTROLLER. 

The  Council  to  Elect  City  Controller;  his  Powers  and 
Duties. 

The  Council  shall  elect,  and  may  by  resolution 
remove,  a  Controller  who  shall  have  a  general  super- 
vision and  control  of  all  the  fiscal  affairs  of  the  city, 
to  be  exercised  in  the  manner  which  may  be  by 
ordinance  prescribed.  It  shall  be  his  duty  to  keep 
the  books  of  account  and  to  make  the  financial  reports 
provided  for  in  Article  II.,  Section  15,  of  this  Act. 
His  books  shall  also  exhibit  accurate  and  detailed 
statements  of  all  moneys  received  and  expended  for 
account  of  the  city  by  all  city  officers  and  other  per- 
sons, and  of  the  property  owned  by  the  city  and  the 
income  derived  therefrom.  He  shall  also  keep  sepa- 


Corporations  Act  299 

rate  accounts  of  each  appropriation,  and  of  the  dates, 
purpose,  and  manner  of  each  payment  therefrom. 

The  Controller  shall  keep  a  separate  record  for 
each  grantee  of  a  franchise  from  the  city  rendering 
a  service  to  be  paid  for  wholly  or  in  part  by  users 
of  such  service,  which  record  shall  show  in  the  case 
of  each  such  grantee: — 

1.  The  true  and  entire  cost  of  construction,  of 
equipment,  of  maintenance,  and  of  the  administration 
and  operation  thereof;  the  amount  of  stock  issued 
if  any;  the  amount  of  cash  paid  in,  the  number  and 
par  value  of  shares,  the  amount  and  character  of 
indebtedness,  if  any;  the  rate  of  taxes,  the  dividends 
declared;   the    character    and    amount    of   all    fixed 
charges;  the  allowance,  if  any,  for  interest,  for  wear 
and  tear  or  depreciation,  all  amounts  and  sources  of 
income ; 

2.  The  amount  collected  annually  from  the  city 
treasury  and  the  character  and  extent  of  the  service 
rendered  therefor  to  the  city ; 

3.  The    amount    collected    annually    from    other 
users  of  the  service  and  the  character  and  extent  of 
the  service  rendered  therefor  to  them.     Such  books 
of  record  shall  be  open  to  public  examination  at  any 
time  during  the  business  hours  of  the  Controller's 
office. 

The  Controller  shall  examine  and  audit  all  bills, 
claims,  and  demands  against  the  city,  and  shall 
promptly  report  in  writing  to  the  Mayor  and  to  the 
Council  any  default  or  delinquency  he  may  discover 
in  the  accounts  of  any  city  officer. 

The  Controller  may  require  any  person  presenting 
for  settlement  an  account  or  claim  for  any  cause 


300  Municipal  Program 

whatever  against  the  city  to  be  sworn  or  affirmed 
before  him,  touching  such  account  or  claim,  and  when 
so  sworn  or  affirmed,  to  answer  orally  as  to  any  facts 
relative  to  the  justness  of  such  account  or  claim. 
Wilful  false  swearing  before  him  shall  be  perjury, 
and  punishable  as  such.  He  shall  settle  and  adjust  all 
claims  in  favor  of  or  against  the  city,  and  all  accounts 
in  which  the  city  is  concerned  as  debtor  or  creditor, 
but  in  adjusting  and  settling  such  claims,  he  shall,  so 
far  as  practicable,  be  governed  by  the  rules  of  law 
and  principles  of  equity  which  prevail  in  courts  of 
justice.  The  power  hereby  given  to  settle  and  adjust 
such  claims  shall  not  be  construed  to  give  such 
settlement  and  adjustment  the  binding  effect  of  a 
judgment  or  decree,  nor  to  authorize  the  Controller 
to  dispute  the  amount  or  payment  of  any  salary 
established  by  or  under  the  authority  of  any  officer  or 
department  authorized  to  establish  the  same,  because 
of  failure  in  the  due  performance  of  his  duties  by 
such  officer,  except  when  necessary  to  prevent 
fraud. 

No  payment  of  city  funds  shall  be  made  except 
upon  draft  or  warrant  countersigned  by  the  Controller, 
who  shall  not  countersign  any  such  draft  or  warrant 
until  he  has  examined  and  audited  the  claim,  and 
found  the  same  justly  and  legally  due  and  payable, 
and  that  the  payment  has  been  legally  authorized, 
and  the  money  therefor  has  been  duly  appropriated, 
and  that  the  appropriation  has  not  been  exhausted. 

The  City  Controller  shall,  on  or  before  the  i$th 
day  of  January,  in  each  year,  prepare  and  transmit  to 
the  City  Council  a  report  of  the  financial  transactions 
of  the  city  during  the  calendar  year  ending  the  3ist 


Corporations  Act  301 

day  of  December  l  next  preceding,  and  of  its  financial 
condition  on  said  3ist  day  of  December.  The  report 
shall  contain  an  accurate  statement,  in  summarized 
form,  and  also  in  detail,  of  the  financial  receipts  of  the 
city  from  all  sources,  and  of  the  expenditures  of  the 
city  for  all  purposes,  together  with  a  detailed  state- 
ment of  the  debt  of  said  city,  of  the  purposes  for 
which  such  debt  had  been  incurred,  and  of  the  prop- 
erty of  said  city,  and  of  the  accounts  of  the  city  with 
grantees  of  franchises. 


\/ 


ARTICLE  VII. 
GENERAL  PROVISIONS. 


Section  i.     Actions  by  Citizens. 

or  more  citizens  who  are  house- 


holders of  said  city  may  maintain  an  action  in  the 
proper  court  to  restrain  the  execution  of  any  illegal, 
unauthorized,  or  fraudulent  contract  or  agreement 
on  behalf  of  said  city,  and  to  restrain  any  disbursing 
officer  of  said  city  from  paying  any  illegal,  unauthor- 
ized, or  fraudulent  bills,  claims,  or  demands  against 
said  city,  or  any  salaries  or  compensation  to  any  person 
in  its  administrative  service  whose  appointment  has 
not  been  made  in  pursuance  of  the  provisions  of  law 
and  the  regulations  in  force  thereunder.  And  in  case 
any  such  illegal,  unauthorized,  or  fraudulent  bills, 
claims,  or  demands,  or  any  such  salary  or  compensa- 
tion shall  have  been  paid,  such  citizens  may  maintain 

»  This  section  assumes  December  31  st  to  be  the  end  of  the 
city's  fiscal  year. 


302  Municipal  Program 

an  action  in  the  name  of  said  city  against  the  officer 
making  such  payment,  and  the  party  receiving  the 
same,  or  either,  or  both,  to  recover  the  amount  so 
paid,  and  such  amount,  after  deducting  all  expenses 
of  the  action,  shall  be  paid  into  the  city  treasury, 
provided,  however,  that  the  court  may  require  such 
citizens  to  give  security  to  indemnify  the  city  against 
costs,  unless  the  court  shall  decide  that  there  was 
reasonable  cause  for  bringing  the  action.  The  right 
of  any  householder  of  the  city  to  bring  an  action  to 
restrain  the  payment  of  compensation  to  any  person 
appointed  to  or  holding  any  office,  place,  or  employ- 
ment in  violation  of  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act, 
shall  not  be  limited  or  denied  by  reason  of  the  fact 
that  said  office,  place,  or  employment  shall  have  been 
classified  as,  or  determined  to  be,  not  subject  to  com- 
petitive examination;  provided,  however,  that  any 
judgment  or  injunction  granted  or  made  in  any  such 
action  shall  be  prospective  only,  and  shall  not  affect 
payments  already  made  or  due  to  such  persons  by  the 
proper  disbursing  officers. 

In  case  of  any  unsatisfied  judgment  or  any  suit  or 

process  of  law  against  said  city,  any or  more 

citizens  who  are  householders  of  said  city  shall,  upon 
petition,  accompanied  by  affidavit  that  they  believe 
that  injustice  will  be  done  to  said  city  in  said  suit  or 
judgment,  be  permitted  to  intervene  and  inquire 
into  the  validity  of  such  judgment  or  defend  said 
suit  or  action,  as  fully  and  completely  as  the  officers 
of  said  city  would  by  law  have  the  right  to  do. 

Sec.  2.     Separate  City  Elections.1 

i  No  election  for  any  city  office  should  be  held  at  a  time 
coinciding  with  the  time  for  holding  State  or  national  elections. 


Corporations  Act  303 

Sec.  3.     Nominations. 

Candidates  for  elective  city  offices  shall  be  nomin- 
ated by  petition  signed  by  qualified  voters  of  the  city. 
The  number  of  the  signatures  to  such  petition  shall 
be  determined  by  the  Council  of  the  city,  but  no  more 
than  fifty  signatures  shall  be  required.  Such  petition 
shall  be  filed  in  the  office  of  the  Mayor  at  least  thirty 
days  before  the  date  of  the  election;  provided,  how- 
ever, that  in  the  case  of  the  death  or  withdrawal  of 
any  candidate  so  nominated,  such  petition  may  be 
so  filed  within  a  less  period  than  thirty  days.  The 
voter  must  vote  separately  for  each  candidate  for 
whom  he  desires  to  vote ;  if  the  election  is  by  ballot 
the  Council  of  the  city  shall  determine  the  form  of 
ballot  to  be  used,  but  the  names  of  all  candidates 
for  the  same  office  must  be  printed  upon  the  ballot  in 
alphabetical  order  under  the  title  of  such  office. 

Sec.  4.     Petitions. 

The  petitions  provided  for  in  this  Act  need  not  be 
one  paper,  and  may  be  printed  or  written,  but  the 
signatures  thereto  must  be  the  autograph  signatures 
of  the  persons  whose  names  purport  to  be  signed.  To 
each  signature  the  house  address  of  the  signer  must  be 
added,  and  the  signature  must  be  made  and  acknow- 
ledged or  proved  before  an  officer  authorized  by  law 
to  take  acknowledgment  and  proof  of  deeds.  The 
certificate  of  such  officer  under  his  official  seal  that  a 
.signature  was  so  made  and  acknowledged  or  proved 
shall  be  sufficient  proof  of  the  genuineness  of  the 
signature  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act.  The  signing  of 

Proper  provisions  to  accomplish  this  result  should  be  drawn 
in  harmony  with  the  general  system  of  holding  elections  in  the 
particular  State. 


304  Municipal  Program 

another's  name,  or  of  a  false  or  fictitious  name,  to  a 
petition  or  the  signing  of  a  certificate  falsely  stating 
either  that  a  signature  was  made  in  the  presence  of 
the  officer  or  acknowledged  or  approved  before  him, 
shall  be  punishable  as  felonies. 


INDEX 

PAGB 
Accounts,  Municipal 

(see  Index  to  Municipal  Program) 
Administrative  or   "Business"  Side  of  Government 
(see  also  Administrative  System, 

Government  is  Government) 

Necessary  to  any  government]  .  .  .  4,  9 
Involves  no  divisive  partisan  issues '  .  .4,5 
Distinction  between,  and  political  side 

Growing  appreciation  of     .         .      61  et  seq. 
(see  also  Political  Side) 
Administrative  System,  Municipal 

(see  also  English  Municipal  System 
Merit  Principle 
Administrative  Side) 

Should  be  controlled  by  the  city        .         .         .       128 
Should  be  framed  by  the  city    .         .         .         .189 
No  state  interference         .....  153-5 
Evils  of  state  interference          .         .         .         .135-7 
(see  State  Supervision) 
Administrative  Service 
Politics  in 

(see  Merit  Principle) 

Not  necessary 4,  5,  8 

Illustrated  by  analogy    of    private 

business 5,  6 

Demoralizes  service      .         .       6,  8,  9,  158-9 
Must  be  prevented      .        .        .         .  6,  8,  9 
Personnel  of 

Should  be  efficient  .  .  .  4, 5,  8,  9 
Political  opinions  unimportant  4,  5,  8,  10 
Should  be  appointed,  not  elected  161 

[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program  pp.  318-323] 
305 


306  Index 

PAGE 

American  Municipal  System 

(see  also  State  Supervision  of  Cities 
Bad  City  Government 
Democracy 
Special  Interests) 
Summary  of  .....  44—49 

No  system  at  all          .         .  44  et  seq.,  Chap.  X. 

Historical  causes  of    .         .         .         .         .  34~37 

Effect  of  Spoils  System        .         .         .         37-40,  45-6 
Effect  of  domination  of  State  Legislature,  Chap. 

III.     (see  also  State  Supervision) 

Compared  with  foreign         .      10-12;  Chap.  IV.,  141-2 
Failure  of,  not  a  failure  of  democracy       10-12,46-49 
Confusion  of  policy-determining  and  administra- 
tive functions         .         .         .         .         .         .         45 

Electoral  methods  must  be  changed         .     181  et  seq. 

(see  Electoral  Methods) 
Cities  under,  in  general 

Ill-governed 10-11 

Not  self-governing       .         .         .  nf  80 

Foreign  experience  not  applied    .10-12,  65-6 
Problems  of,  came  unawares         .         .     65-6 

Hopeful  signs 77-82 

Bad  City  Government 

(see  also  Good  City  Government 
Electoral  Methods 
State  Supervision) 

Causes  of 10 

Not  the   result   of   democracy          .         .    10-11,  200 

In  England  and  Europe 3 

In  the  United  States 

(see  American  Municipal  System) 
Ballots 

(see  Electoral  Methods) 
Board  of  Directors 

(see  Texas  Plan 

English  Municipal  Code) 
Boss,  the 

[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


Index  307 

Boss — Continued  PAGB 

(see  also  Special  Interests) 
His  origin          .         .         .         .         .         .         .195 

Inevitable  under  present  system       .         .         .   195-6 

Boston  Charter 

Outline  of  proposed  new  .  .  .  108-113 
cf.  outlines  of  Municipal  Program  .  .  234-37 

"Business  Principles" 

In  city  government,  Chap.  VIII. 

Centralization  of  Power 
(see  Brooklyn  Idea 
Texas  Idea 

English  Municipal  Code) 
Charters 

(see  also  Frames  of  Government 
Home-made  Charters) 

Should  be  mere  outlines 188 

Essentials  of,  Chap.  XIV. 
Checks  and  Balances 

(see  also  English  Municipal  System) 

Origin  of  theory 56-7,71-2 

Wrong  in  city  government  .  .  .  54-6,  83 
Imbedded  in  constitutions  .  .  .  .  56 
How  avoided  by  people  .  .  .  51-2,58-60 

(see  also  Democracy) 
Citizen  and  City,  Chap.  X. 

(see  Self-Government) 
City  and  State 

(see  State  and  City) 
"City  Government  Is  Business  not  Politics" 

(see  Chap.  VIII.) 
City  Government  7s  Government 
(see  also  Political  Side 

Self-Government 
English  Municipal  Code) 

Fundamental  .  .  .  Chap.  VIII.,  9,  153,  155 
Ignored  in  America 

(see  State  Supervision) 
Appreciated  abroad 
[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


308  Index 

(see  English  Municipal  Code) 
City  Legislature 

(see  Local  Legislation) 

City  Officials  as  Agents  of  State  .         .         .  166,  168-9 

(see  also  State  Supervision 
Self-Government) 
Civic  Patriotism 

(see  Self-Government 
Electoral  Methods) 

Classification  of  Cities 143 

(see  also  State  Supervision) 
Constitutional  Limitations 

(see  also  Democracy,  Advance  of) 

Use  of 71-3,172,87^5^. 

How  circumvented    ......  144-5 

Significant  results  of,  in  Illinois         .         .         .  88-91 
Council,  City 

(see  English  Municipal  Code 
Self-Government 
cf .  Newport  Plan) 

Debt  Limit 

(see  Index  to  Municipal  Program) 
Democracy 

(see  also  English  Municipal  System 
Good  City  Government) 

Definition  of 10-11 

Principles  not  forms  important    10-11,  169-70,  198-9 
More  nearly  approximated  in  English  cities  than 

American       .         .         .         .         .         .         .         51 

Responsible  for  good  city  government  abroad  .  10-12 
Not  responsible  for  American  municipal  failure 

10-12,  46-9 

Does  not  prevent  efficiency,  Chap.  XVI. 
The  real  opponents  of,  Chap.  XV. 
The  city  the  battle-ground  of,  Chap.  XV. 
Advance  of 

Weapons  of 174 

Greatest  political  force  in  England  and 
[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


Index  309 


Democracy — Continued  pAGB 

America  for  a  century  .         .  50-51 

Effect   of   written   constitutions    and 

statutes  upon.         .       50—54,  57—60,  71-4 
Illustrations  of    .         .         .          52-3,  174-6 
Effect  of  certain  doctrines  on,  Chap.  V. 
Certain  impediments  to,  Chap.  V. 
Direct  Legislation 

(see  Initiative) 
Distribution  of  Powers 

(see  Checks  and  Balances 
Political  Side 
Administrative  Side) 

Efficiency  in  City  Government 
(see  also  Merit  Principle 

Chap.  XVI.) 
Elective  Offices 

(see  also  Electoral  Methods) 

Too  numerous  ......  159-60 

Should  not  include  administrative     .         .         .       1 6 1 
(cf.  Boston   Charter,    Newport   Plan, 

New  York  Charter) 
Electoral  Methods 

(see  also  Partisanship 

Elective  Offices 
Separation  of  Elections) 

Importance  of 149 

Outline  of  correct     ....         182-3,  *&5~7 
Present  methods 

Mere  shams J94-5 

Origin  of 54-6 

Especially  injurious  in   city  govern- 
ment       ......     68-9 

Promote  special  interests    .         178-9,  186-7 
Voter  helpless  under  ....     44-6 

Simplification  needed.          .       57—60,  159—60 

(cf .  Boston  Charter,  Newport  Plan) 
[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


310  Index 

PAOB 

English  Municipal  Code 

(see  also  English  Municipal  System) 

Fundamentals  of       ....         15-25, 39-44 

Operation  of 15-25,  39-44 

Council  of  City  under 
Powers  of 

Adequate  for  all  local  needs  .  .  15,  16 
Complete  over  administrative  .  16,  18—20 
Coupled  with  complete  responsibility  .  19-21 
All  powers  of  city  concentrated  .15,16,1 9-2 1 
Nomination  and  election  of  members 

Simple  methods 16,17 

Separated  from  national      .         .         .         17 

Terms  of  members 17 

Aldermen 

(see  Council) 
Mayor 

(see  Council) 
Administrative  Service 

Merit  principle  and  efficiency    .         .         .         18 
Concentration  of  power  and  responsibility         .  1 9—2 1 

Democratic  results 20,21 

Compare  results  in  the  United  States,  Chap.  IV. ;  10-12 
Supervision  by  Central  Government 

Is  administrative  not  legislative          .         .     21—2 
Efficient,  non-political        .         .         .         .22—5 
Compare  the  United  States        .         .         .     21-5 
Nominations  and  Elections 

(see  Council) 
English  Municipal  System 

(see  also  English  Municipal  Code) 

Successful 3, 6-10,  14-25 

More  democratic  than  American        .  Chap.  IV. ;  10-2 1 
Basic  principles  of    .         .         .     Chaps.  II.,  IV.;  9,  10 
Especially  educative    for   the  United    States, 
Chap.  IV. 

Before  1835 13,  14 

Since  1835  (see  English  Municipal  Code) 
[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


Index  311 

PAGB 
European  Cities 

(see  also  English  Municipal  System) 

Basic  principles  of  government  in     .         .         .     9,  10 

Well  governed 10,  n 

More  democratic  than  American        .         .          3,6-10 
Executive 

(see  also  President 
Governor 
Brooklyn  Idea) 
Growing  trust  in 82 

Foreign  Experience 

(see  English  Municipal  System) 

Not  applied        .....  10—12,  65-6 

Frame  of  Government 

(see  also  Charters) 

Should  be  made  and  amended   by  each  city 

for  itself 15  7-8 

Should  be  simple 159-61 

Franchise 

(see  Index  to  Municipal  Program 
Electoral  Methods 
Public  Utilities) 

Galveston  Plan 

Origin  and  results  of         .         .         .  97-101,123,161 
Good  City  Government 

(see  also  Democracy 

English  Municipal  System) 
Self-Government) 
Basic  principles  of 

Outlined    .     Chap.  XL;  4,  5,  7,  9-11,  62-64 
Not  impracticable       .         .         .  6,  7 

Successfully  applied  abroad  .       6-8 

Proved   by  experience   at  home   and 

abroad 10 

Real  issue  in  the  fight  for          ....   196-7 
In  England   and  Europe  .         .         .         .         3,  6-10 
(see  also  English  Municipal  System) 
Facilitated  by  general  conditions         .     61-2 
[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  -pp.  318-323] 


312  Index 

Good  City  Government — Continued  PAGE 

In  the  United  States 

Must  come  through  the  application  of 

democratic  principles       .         .         .         12 
Growing  easier  of  attainment     .         .     61-2 
Good  Government 

Fight  for,  centers  in  the  city,  Chap.  XV. 
"Government  by  Commission" 

(see  also  English  Municipal  Code 
Texas  Plan) 

Meaning  of 97  n. 

Is  democratic 97  n. 

Description  of    .         .         .         .         .         .         .         99 

Results  of 99-101 

Governor 

(see  also  Democracy) 

Power  of,  with  people 58-60 

Growth  of  Cities 

(see  also  Self-Government) 

Economic  causes  of 1-3 

Universality  of  .         .         .  .         .2-3 

In  the  United  States         .         .         .  34-37,  65-6 

Vital  results  of 196-7 

Home-Made  Charters 

(see  also  Charters 

Frame  of  Government) 

Theory  of 91-7 

Spread  of  idea  of 93-7 


Importance  of  Good  City  Government 

(see  Chap.  XV.) 
Independent  Voting 

(see  also  Partisanship) 

In  city  elections         ......     76-8 

Initiative,  Referendum,  and    Recall 

Essence  of 105 

Spread  of 105-108,  103,   112 

[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


Index  313 

PAGE 
Judiciary 

(see  also  Self-Government) 

City  should  have  its  own         .         .         .          149-50 
Jurisdiction  of  City 

(see  also  Self-Government 

State  Supervision) 

Need  not  conflict  with  State's         .          126,  130—31 
Should  cover  all  local  matters    .         .         127-8,131-2 

Legislation  for  City 

(see  Local  Legislation 
State  Supervision 
Self-Government) 
Legislative 

(See  also  Constitutional  Limitations) 

Distrust  of 82,  87,  147 

Legislative  Meddling 

(see  State  Supervision) 
Local  Electorate 

(see  Self-Government) 
Local  Legislation 

(see  also  Self-Government) 

Should  be  by  the  city       .         .         .      9,  121,  146-49 

So  abroad 9, 10 

Local  Policy  for  City 

(see  also  Self-Government) 

Need  of 7,  69 

Subservience  to  national  and  state  wrong          .         69 

Machine  Government 

(see  Special  Interests 

State  Supervision) 
Mayor 

(see  also  Executive) 
In  England 

(see  English  Municipal  Code) 
In  the  United  States 

Concentration  of  power  in  .         .  82,  84 

"Brooklyn  Idea"        .         .         .      84-7,  123 
[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


3U  Index 

Mayor — Continued  PAOB 

(cf.  Boston  Charter, 
New  York  Charter) 

Mayor's  Veto  on  State  Legislation 
(see  also  State  Supervision) 
In  New  York 86-7 

Merit  Principle  and  System 

(see  also  Administrative  Service) 

Definition  of      .......         66 

Growth  of ,  in  America       ....     66-8,110 

Great  need  of,  in  cities       .         .         .  68-9,158-9 

Comment  on  the  proposed  new          .         .         .  123-4 

Municipal  Reform  Act  of  1835 

(see  English  Municipal  Code) 

Newport  Charter 
Newport  Plan 

Outline  of 101-105 

Nominations 

(see  Electoral  Methods) 

Partisanship,  National  and  State 
(see  also  Electoral  Methods 
State  Supervision) 

Origin  of 70-75 

Historical  intensity  of 70,  75 

Should  be  excluded  from  city  elections     .          158-60 
Effect  upon  cities      ......  69-70 

Cooling  of 75-6 

Political  or  Policy-Determining  Side  of  Government 
(see  also  Government  is  Government) 
Necessary  to  any  government  .         .         .          4,  9-10 
Involves  divisive  partisan  issues        .       4, 115-16, 121 
Distinction  between,  and  Administrative  Side 

Exists  in  all  government     .         .         .       5, 6 
Especially  important  in  city  govern- 
ment      .         .     Chap.  VIII.;  5,  6,  198-200 

Fundamental 4,  5 

Growing  appreciation  of      61,  62,  68-9,  79,  80 
[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


Index  315 

PAGE 
Political  Side  of  Government— Continued 

Recognized  abroad      ....     63-4 
Illustrated    by    analogy    of    private 

business 5,6 

Politicians 

(see  Special  Interests 

Boss) 
Politics 

Definition  of 

(see  also  Political  Side) 
Popular  Government 

(see  Democracy) 
President 

(see  also  Executive 
Governor) 

Power  of,  with  people 58-60 

Privilege 

(see  Special  Interests) 
Public  Opinion 

(see  also  Democracy) 

Need  and  power  of  .         .       Chap.  XII.;  172-74 

Public  Utilities 

(see  Franchise) 

City,  not  special  interests,  should  control  .          .   1 93-4 

Recall 105-108 

(see  Initiative) 

A  peculiar  form  of     .         .         .         .         .         .112 

Referendum 105-108 

(see  Initiative) 
Responsible  Public  Officials 

(see  Electoral  Methods) 

Self-Government  for  Cities 

(see  also  State  Supervision 

English  Municipal  System) 
Pre-requisites  of,  Chap.  XI. 
Greater  degree  of,  must  come,  Chap.  X. 
Impossible  under  present  electoral  methods       .   181-4 
[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


3*6  Index 


PAGE 
Self -Government  for  Cities — Continued 

City  should  have  a  local  policy          .         .     7,  69,  121 
And  adequate  power  to  meet  all  local  needs 

125-6,  155-6,  189-90 
Local  self-government  the  corner-stone  of  our 

institutions 184 

Separation  of  Elections 161-66 

(see  also  Partisanship 

Electoral  Methods) 
Special  Interests 

(see  also  Democracy 

Boss) 

Power  over  city  government     .         .         .    192,194-5 
Favored  by  charter  forms         .         .         .          190-91 
Opposed  to  all  democracy         .         .         .         .192 
Special  Laws 

(see  State  Supervision) 
Spoils  System 

(see  Partisanship 

State  Supervision) 
State  and  City 

(see  also  State  Supervision 
Self -Government) 

Relation  a  dual  one 125 

(a)    City  as  local  government     .         .    125,  132-3 
(6)    City  as  agent  of  State          .         .     133  et  seq. 
Compared  with  Nation  and  State        .       130 
State  Laws 

(see  also  State  Supervision) 

Proper  scope  of 156-7 

Enforcement  of,  by  city    ....          133-3  9 
State  Supervision  of  Cities 
(see  also  Jurisdiction 
State  Laws 
Partisanship 
State  and  City) 
Should  be  administrative,  not  legislative 

9,  21-5,  Chap.  III.,  135,  166-8;  cf.  112-13 
[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


Index  3*7 

PAG» 

State  Supervision  of  Cities — Continued 

Should  not  extend  to  details  of  administration 

I3S-7.  153-5 
In  England 

(see  English  Municipal  Code) 
In  the  United  States 

Wide  scope  of,  Chap.  III. 
Compared  with  English       .         .  10-12,  31-2 
Amounts  to  an  injurious  domination  of 
City  by  State;  causes,  evils,  extent 
of    .  Chap.  III.;  79-81,  125,  135-7,  142-56 

Superfluous  Legislation 132 

(see  also  State  Supervision) 

Texas  Plan 

(see  Galveston  Plan 

Government  by  Commission) 
Town  Meeting  Plan 

(see  Newport  Plan) 
[See  also  Index  to  Municipal  Program,  pp.  318-323] 


INDEX  TO  MUNICIPAL  PROGRAM 

PAGB 

Abattoirs,  powers  of  cities  as  to  .  .  .  264-5 

Accounts,  Municipal  .....  226-33,273-4 

Uniformity  of  .         .         .         .         .         .          249-50 

State  audit  of 228,  273 

Actions  by  citizens 219,301-2 

Administrative  Functions 

Separated  from  Political  .  .  .  209,216-17 

Administrative  offices 

Terms  not  fixed  .  .  .  .  .210-11,292 
Administrative  service 

(see  also  Merit  Principle) 

Merit  principle    in.         .         .         .     213,  278  et  seq. 

Framed  by  Council  .....  210,296 
Annexation  of  territory  to  cities  ....  261-3 
Assessment  powers  of  cities  ....  269-70 

BaUot 

Form  of 217,  243 

Secrecy  of 243 

Bookkeeping, municipal       .         .         226-33,  249-50,  273-74 

Budget 

Submitted  by  Mayor        .         .         .         .         211,277 
Changed  by  Council  .         .         .         .         211,  277 

Budget  of  city^ 277 

Charters  » 

Powers  of  cities  as  to 252-5 

(see  also  Home-Made  Charters) 

Cities  frame  their  own       ....     234,252-5 
[See  also  Index,  pp.  305-317] 


Index  to  Municipal  Program      319 

PACK 

Cities,  powers  of  ....          251-2,263^5^. 

City  as  agent  of  state  .....  209,274 
City  as  a  local  government  .  .  .  .  207-09 
City  under  municipal  program  ....  234-37 

Civil  service  of  city 278^5^. 

Civil-service  commissioners  ....  278-9 

Powers  of  investigation  of        ...  285-6 

Records  of 284-5 

Reports  of 282 

Civil-service  regulations 278  et  seq. 

(see  also  Merit  Principle) 

Penalties  for  violation  of j .         .         .         .          287-91 

Illegal  payments  under 284 

Constitutional  Amendments 243 

Table  of  contents  of 241 

Contracts  by  cities 268-9 

Controller 

Elected  by  Council    .         .         .  210-13,298-301 

Powers  of  ...        211—12,  299  et  seq. 

Removed  by  Council        .         .         .         .        212,  298 
Why  not  appointed  by  Mayor?       .         .         .        212 

Non-partisan  position  of 212 

Supervises    accounts    of   city  .          212,  298-301 

Supervises  accounts  of  grantees  of  franchises 

221—22,  245,  299 
Council 

Composition  of  ....  210,297-8 

Elected .        .       209,  293 

Elects  its  own  officers        .         .         .         .         .294 

Elects  controller, 298 

Establishes  municipal  offices       .         .         .         .296 

Fixes  its  own  rules 294 

Judge  of   election  of    its  members    subject  to 

review  by  the  courts 293 

Meetings  of 294-5 

Powers  of 210 

Powers  of  appropriation  .         .         .         .         .296-7 
Powers  of  investigation     .         .         .  210-11,296 

Powers  of  taxation 296-7 

[See  also  Index,  pp.  305-317] 


320      Index  to  Municipal  Program 

Council — Continued  PAGE 

Quorum    ........       294 

Removes  controller 298 

Councillors 

Election  and  terms  of    .         .         .  210,  292-93 

Courts,  city 

Created  by  city          ....       206,  250,  266 
Jurisdiction  of.         .         .         .  206-07,250,266 

Debts 

What  included  in  debt  limit      .  222-25,  245-48 

Direct  legislation         .         .         .        218-19,  248-49,  297-98 
Dock  powers        ........       264 

Elections 

Simplicity  of 216-18,  296 

Separation  from  state  and  national  .          216-18,  302 
Elective  officers 

Councillors  and  Mayor  only      .         .         .       209,  251 
English  Cities 

Government  of,  outlined         ....         213-14 

Municipal  Program  in  part  modelled  upon       214-17 

Ferries,  wharves,  docks,  streets,  etc.      220-22,244-45,  267-68 
Inalienability  of         .         .         220—22,  244—45,  267-68 

Ferry  powers 264 

Financial  reports 

By  cities  to  state 227,  249 

What  they  should  contain        .         .     227-32,249-50 

Franchises 

(see  also  Public  Utilities) 

Grants  of  .....    220—21,  244—45 

Powers  of  city  as  to  ....  220,  267-68 

Inalienability  of 220,  244-45 

Accounts  of  grantees  of     .         .         .         .221-22,245 
Reports  by  grantees  of  .         .         .          221-22 

General  laws 

Defined 208 

Affecting  city,  unrestricted        .         .         .        205, 208 
General  ticket,  election  of  Council  by  .         .         .293 

[See  also  Index,  pp.  305-317] 


Index  to  Municipal  Program      321 

PAGB 
Good  city  government 

Outline  of 234-37 

Harbor  powers 264 

Heads  of  departments 

Appointed  by  Mayor  ....  210,278 
At  Council  meetings 276 

Home-made  charters  .....     233-34,252-55 

Incorporation  of  cities          ....  208,252,260-61 
Indebtedness 

Power  of  city  to  incur       .         222-25,  245-48,  270-72 

Initiative 218-19 

Investigations      ......  210-11,292,296 

Judicial  officers  of  city         ....  206-07,  250,  266 

Market  powers 264 

Mayor 

Attendance  at  Council  meetings  .  .  .  276 
Budget  prepared  by  .  .  .  .  211,277 
Compensation  fixed  by  Council  .  .  .  278 

Elected 209,  251 

Messages  to  Council 211,277 

Powers  of  .....  210—11,  214 
Power  of  appointment  .  .  .  .  251,278 
Power  of  investigation  .  .  .  .  .292 
Power  of  removal  ....  210,  251,  291-9* 
Removal  of,  by  governor  .  .  .  211,  276 
Suspension  of,  by  governor  .  .  .  .211 

Term  of 211,275 

Vacancy  in  office  how  filled       .         .         .         .275 

Veto  power  of 276-7 

Merit  system 213,  251,  278-92 ^ 

Minority  representation        ....     248-49,  297—98 

Municipal  Corporations  Act 260 

Table  of  contents  of 256 

Municipal  organization 250-51 

[See  also  Index,  pp.  305-317] 


322      Index  to  Municipal  Program 

Municipal  organization — Continued  PAGE 

Determined  by  Council 296 

Municipal  Program 

Origin  of 203-04 

General  divisions  of 204-05 

City  under 234-37 

Summary  of 234-37 

National  Municipal  League 

Origin  of 203 

Nomination  of  city  officers 

In  general 217-18,243-44 

By  petition        .         .  .         .243-44,  303-04 

Officers,  terms  of ,  not  fixed          .         .         .         .210-11,292 
Ordinance,  powers  of 264 

Penal  powers 265 

Petitions 255,  303-04 

Petition,  nomination  by       .         .         217-18,243-44,303-04 
Powers  of  the  city         .         .         .  .         .     205  et  seq. 

Sufficient  for  all  local  functions          .         .          207-08 

Limitations  upon       .....          205-06 

(see  Cities ;  special  Legislation) 

Private  bills 244 

Proportional  representation         .         .         .     248-49,  297-98 
Public  utilities     .          .         .         .         .         .         .         .205 

Control  of          .    219-22,  244-45,  251-52,  263,  267-68 

(see  Franchises) 

"Recall 218-19 

Referendum 218-19 

Registration  of  voters 217-18,243 

Schools,  power  of  cities  over         .         .         .         .         .265 

Secrecy  in  voting          .         .         .         .         .         .217,  243 

Self-supporting  enterprises 

Bonds  for,  not  included  in  debt  limit .  222-25,  246-47 

Sewer  powers 264 

Sinking  funds 225-26,  247 

Special  legislation 

Denned  205-06 

[See  also  Index,  pp.  305-317] 


Index  to  Municipal  Program      323 


Special  legislation  —  Continued 

How  enacted     ..... 

City's  veto  power  upon  .  .  . 
State  and  city 

Relation  of  ..... 
State  interference 

With  cities,  restricted  .  .  . 
Structural  plan  of  city  government  outlined 

Taxation 

Powers  of  cities  over          ... 
Tax  rate       ....... 

Territory,  annexation  of       .... 

Trusts 

Uniform  accounting 
(see  Accounts) 

Veto  power 

Of  Mayor 
Of  city 

(see  Special  Legislation) 


Water-works 
Wharf  powers 


[See  also  Index,  pp.  305-317] 


PAGB 

205-06,251-52 
205-06,  252 

.          208-09 

207-08,  274 
.          214-16 


205,269 
270-72 
261-63 
232-33 

249-50 


276-77 


264 
264 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

RENEWALS  ONLY— TEL  NO.  642-3405 
This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 

MPDlD  MI27D-2PM42 


I 


•S-; 


Y 


LD21A-60m-3,'70 

(N5382slO)476-A-32 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


M          7 

••  -{Sir, 


YB  08776 


o 

-P4- 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


